body. dodd-frank, affordable care act, i could go on and on. we kick the can down the road as is often heard on sticky issues. politically sensitive issues that politicians don't want to deal with. because we know ultimately there will be regulators to fill in the gaps of our vague laws. well, the reins act would prevent that. it would incentivize members of congress to take on the hard issues in the beginning because they'd know that in the end those sloose going to come back and have to be resolved in this body. . when i go home and meet with people and they speak to me about specific regulations that are causing them pain, the best i can do and the colleagues can do is say listen, we'll try and repeal that particular regulation by preventing it from being implemented at the agency, by impacting the funding of that agency. these are very difficult things to do and it's so incredibly

difficult to identify all the bad regulations that are out fl. , under the reins act unelected bureaucrats would not be accountable and members of congress would and that is the inat the present time of the reins act. i believe in regulations, smart regulations a this bill is about improving the regulatory process so here in the united states of america, this remains a vibrant place to live with a balanced economy. the american people must have a voice about what those rules will be. and congress cannot skirt responsibility to legislate. again, i would like to close here by thanking those who led this effort, mr. collins in particular, for leading the floor conversation. he has shown great leadership, working very hard. you came here as did other

members of the freshman class to make a difference by supporting the reins act and i think you will advance that cause. mr. collins: it is easy to follow in the stoot steps. and we will work to continue that fight. i thank you for being here tonight. it is now with great pleasure, another freshman who has come from north of me in north compassion for his constituents. mr. holding: i thank the gentleman from georgia for the opportunity to discuss this administration's excessive regulations. we know the harmful effect that overregulations had on the economy and since taking office, president obama and his administration have continuously burdened the american people

with an exceptional number of regulations, farming, businesses and the economy. mr. speaker, small businesses in this country are essential to our economic stability. small businesses encourage innovation and hard work. it's the american dream to have a unique idea and build something from scratch. and that, mr. speaker, is exactly what small businesses do. mr. speaker, small businesses have created 64% of net new jobs over the past 15 years and employed just over half of all private sector employees. and this stalled economy, small businesses are struggling to be successful and we need to take some of the current regulatory weight off their shoulders. recently, back home, i spent the week going around to different chambers of commerce in my district. i went to wake forest, i went to

ex and rocky mount and met with several hundred small business owners, and folks who work in small businesses. and i heard the constant complaint of overregulation. and i said has the government done anything that you know of in the last five years which would make your life as a small business person better? i got no positive responses, mr. speaker. that's stunning. the regulations are complicated and compliance is time consuming and expensive and sometimes job creators aren't informed of new regulations in a timely manner giving them little time to comply with them. they are facing uncertainty due to these regulations and not constant in government policy coming out of washington and have no trust in the ability of washington to do things that are

in their better interests. the uncertainty may prevent an employer from hiring more people or forcing them to let go of employees. as mr. yoho said, he has small businesses that are shooting lower rather than shoot higher. small businesses may have to re-evaluate how and when they do business, and that is unfortunate. small businesses have no confidence in their government to give them pro-growth policies. excessive regulations harm small businesses and our country's growth as a whole. the small business office of advocacy has reported that federal rulemaking has increased burden of $1.75 trillion on our economy. and earlier this year on the judiciary committee we heard testimony in the past four years alone the cumulative burden has

increased by $520 billion. mr. speaker, i'm not only concerned about the negative effect of regulations on our overall economy but the administration's abuse of power. president obama has been encouraged by regulatory advocates to circumvent regular order and impose the climate change ajeopardya through regulations and made it clear in his state of the union speech earlier this year his inat the present time to do so. i'm also concerned with the fact that the administration has repeatedly missed the required deadline for releasing an agenda of deregulatory actions twice a year. this agenda lays out each agency's proposed regulation and annual regulatory plan and businesses need to know this information so they can anticipate how forth coming regulations will affect them. and this administration needs to have more accountability and more transparency about the

harmful effects of these abundant, may i say, excessive regulations. mr. speaker, in my district in north carolina, many of the towns rely on small businesses. that's all that's there. and whether it's a local restaurant owned by the sam family for generations or an accounting firm or clothing store or the town doctor, regulations are a major concern for them. and we should be doing what we can do to encourage small businesses, not deter them with strenuous and excessive regulations. i yield back. mr. collins: i thank the gentleman from north carolina. what we are dealing with here is dealing with jobs. and what you are doing is small businesses, as we have seen -- 44% of the total u.s.-private payroll and create half of the non-farm jobs. we have got to look at this. we can all come together as the

gentleman from indiana stated a few moments ago, this could be a bipartisan issue as we look to jobs and things he we can bring to the floor. and we came up here to try and help and bring the voices of those who could not be up here on help them in their businesses and work hard and i appreciate you so much for sharing your experiences in north carolina and what we are doing, fighting hard against these regulations so we can see more jobs created. mr. holding: numbers don't lie. we are spending a lot of money to comply with regulations. mr. collins: i appreciate the gentleman for being here tonight. it's something we all see. in 2011 speech, president obama stated that rules have gotten out of balance and the result is chilling effect on growth and jobs. i believe the president is correct about that. the rules are skewed that the nation's regulatory system is at war with our nation's business

and in an executive order saying that those that are outdated and if there are rules on the books stifling job creation, we will fix them. i tell you what, i agree with the president on this and i want to say this is something we can move forward with and something that has an effect because right now these burdens are killing american industry and american jobs. when businesses are more concerned right now, 40% is what i have seen in the latest survey, 40% of companies saying policy uncertainty in washington is preventing them from inputting investments and job creation to work. this is something we have to be part of fixing because it matters for jobs. industries such as manufacturing, technology are fighting to compete in a global market but survive the regulatory beast. congress should be encouraging

innovation and make it easier to bring new products or processes to the market. outdated regulations should be cleared off the books especially those created by unelected bureaucrats. let's restore a commonsense proach that encourages enterprise. i asked businesses to tell me how regulations are impacting their ability to grow and impact jobs. here are some of the responses we received back. one response said, due to new regulation that require businesses to issue 10 9's to every employee we write a check to, we have to be more selective. i have no longer the opportunity to give folks a shot at the job. we have to make them full regular employees so we don't look at hiring as many employees. another of my constituents said the biggest issue we face from

the federal government is the e.p.a.'s lack of approval of products in a timely manner and removal of excellent safe products from the market all together. you see, unfortunately, regulatory burdens created by the e.p.a. are all too common story. a business in northeast georgia wrote to me that the e.p.a. is requiring off-road engines, and new standards are changing every two years. the final we hope will be in place by 2015. the result is of the dramatic and frequent changes in regulation is the redesign of our product which would allow us to retool products to the u.s. and cannot happen until 2015. we hope to move our products back to georgia. i say hope to, because the rapid rise in regulations under the current administration may cause us not to move production at

all. we are all for protecting the environment and are being good corporate citizens, the new regulations are costly and new value to the productivity of the product or the marketplace. i couldn't have said that better myself. regulations should be expedient, unambiguous, minimizing the uncertainty. this is how the government can facilitate. i appreciate the comments from my colleagues tonight. it has been clear that we need regulatory and greater now than ever. as we have heard tonight, the estimated cost of regulation is more than half the federal budget itself. let me just stop right there. for the first time in history, the estimated cost of regulation is more than half the federal budget itself. and we wonder why we are struggling with jobs right now. we wonder why our businesses are

struggling with what they are going to do and how they are going to manage. you see, i'm a firm believer. there are many times we come to this house floor and we talk about things and in ambiguous terms. we talk about the big picture. we talk about the process. and people hear those conversations, they hear these words but aren't sure how to fix them. and i'm a firm believer from a democrat and republican perspective how we can best lead by giving people information on why this matters to them. i'm going to spend a few minutes talking about that. it is troubling in a time when families are struggling, american families are paying $15,000 per year in hidden regulatory taxes. 4,678 in hidden regulatory taxes. you know what is going on and ow we're causing people to

spend and also at the same time saying we want to create new jobs and new opportunities. here's what happened. instead of paying hidden regulatory tax, american families could buy a new car. fiesta or a chevrolet sonic, we hear it all the time how manufacturing creates jobs on all levels starting from the manufacturing, from the parts and the dealers and the auto parts, how they all work together. instead of paying these regulatory costs, why don't we get them to buy a new car? that's what our auto dealers would like. that's what the chain would like. but instead they are trapped and bound. most of the rules and regulations are preventing our businesses from growing as a result of obamacare and other thippings are counterproductive. i want to go back to what it

means to the person sitting around the table who may have said, what are they talking about. what we are talking about is your pocketbook and regulations that can help you spend money the way you want to, spend money for your family's future, spend money that revives our economy. you send your child to college, one year of tuition and fees at e university of georgia is $10,262. instead, they are trapped baying almost $15,000 in hidden regulatory tax that comes through every year. . . . make regulations that are simple to understand and comply with. one of the problems that i also see in washington is sometimes we come to the floor and we talk about problems but we never provide an answer.

we never provide an answer on what can actually be done. as my colleagues and i have demonstrated, we're committed to providing regulatory relief to businesses and families. there are several key pieces of ledgeslation that are first and -- legislation that are first and important steps in alleviating the regulatory burden. the first bill i introduced in congress was h.r. 1493, the sunshine to regulatory decrees and settlement act of 2013. this legislation ensures the e.p.a. cannot continue to enter into closed-door agreements with environmental groups without transparency and public participation. it does not affect the ability to bring suits, it just makes them clearer. many of the policy rules and regulations that have impacted businesses and industries across theation that have resulted from these backroom decrees and it's time we bring transparency and public participation back into the rulemake prague sess. what else can we do? -- rulemaking process. what else can we do? h.r. 367. we end the e.p.a. settlements. we can require federal agencies

to choose the lowest-cost rulemaking alternative, h.r. 21 22. there are things that we can do and i believe the american public is looking to this place. they're looking to their capitol for real solutions. they're looking to their capitol for hope. they're looking for relief. every day. men and women get up and they wake their children up as i did this morning and they go to work and they go to make a better life. many of those are small business owners wanting to add jobs, wanting to add to their businesses. but these regulations are killing that possibility right now. i believe when you look at what we've talked about here in my -- and my colleagues have talked about here on the floor, and i appreciate all them being here, we bring to light what is really happening and that is that regulations are not adding anything except government jobs. it's time we get back out and add jobs on main street and when

we add jobs on main street, everybody is impacted. i want to thank my colleagues for joining me tonight and highlighting why american families and businesses are desperately need -- so desperately need regulatory relief. our freshmen are going to continue to do this, highlighting the real work that we believe matters to families and matters to americans. because when we're up here, we're up here as you're doing your work. the things that you sent us here to do was to work for you. and that's what we're going to continue to do and the freshmen class is going to continue to do just that and as we've mentioned tonight, not only talking about overregulation, we're going to be talking about many things in the weeks to come and we're just letting the people know that we're here because we believe to make a difference, along with both sides of the aisle. let's come together and see what we can do to make sure that not only regulations but other things get done so this government puts people, helps the businesses and our communities get back to work. and that's what i want to be about. and i'm glad that we were here tonight to do that. but before i close out, do i see a friend on the floor. the gentleman from arizona, mr.

franks, and as we're through with the regulation part, i noticed you'd asked the time and i will yield to the gentleman from arizona, my friend, mr. franks. mr. franks: well, mr. speaker, i just want to thank the distinguished gentleman from georgia for yielding this time. one of the great hopes that i see that portends for a better future for america is to see men like doug collins join this group and this congress. mr. speaker, it seems like we are never quite so eloquent as when we are decrying the crimes of a past generation. while we oftentimes remain staggering blind to some of our most intellectually sights predecessors when it comes to fating and rejecting atrocities in our own time. whether it was slavery or the many human genocides across

history, the patterns were the same. mr. speaker, innocent human beings, children of god all, were systematically dehumanized and then subjected to the most horrifying inhumanity. all the while humans society as a whole at first hardened their hearts and turned away. mr. speaker, truth and time travel on the same road and though it was often agonizingly slow, the truth of these tragic inhumanities in our past began to dawn on the people of reason and goodwill. their hearts first and then their minds began to change. you know, mr. speaker, i've often asked myself, what was it, what was it that changed their minds? what changed the minds of those who had previously embraced and almost -- an almost invincible ignorance, to hide from themselves the horror of what was happening to their innocent fellow human beings?

i sure wish i knew that answer, mr. speaker. because you see, today such a conundrum looms before humanity again. the most glaring recent example of which are the gut-wrenching revelations surrounding a trial and conviction in philadelphia of dr. kermit goss nell. -- gosnell. in the words of grand jury report, he had a simple solution for unwanted babies. he killed them. he didn't call it that, he called it, quote, ensuring fetal demise. the way he ensured fetal demise was by sticking open scissors in the back of the child's neck and cutting the spinal cord. he called it snipping. over the years there were hundreds of snippings. when authorities entered the clinic of the doctor, they found a torture chamber for little babies that i do not have the words or the stomach to adequately describe. ranb suffice to say that he

a systemic practice to cut the spines of those babies who had survived his attempt to abort them. ashley baldwin, one of dr. goss nell's employees, said she saw babies breathing and she described one as two feet long, that no longer had eyes or a mouth but in her words was like making this, quote, screeching sound, and it, quote, sounded like a little alien. for god seas sake, mr. speaker, we are better than that. america is better than that. and yet if kermit gosnell had killed these children he had -- before they had passed through the birth canal a few minutes earlier, it would have all been perfectly legal in many states, in in the land, the land of the free and the home of the brave. mr. speaker, more than 325 te-term unborn babies were

killed without anesthesia in america just yesterday. and many of them, so many of them cried and screamed as they died. but because it was amniotic fluid going over the vocal cords instead of air, we couldn't hear them. and all of them had at least four things in common. first, they were just little babies who had done nothing wrong to anyone on earth. and each one of them died a nameless, lonely and agonizing death. and each one of their mothers was callously abandoned to deal with the emotional results that will inevitably follow. and all the gifts that these children might have brought to humidity -- humanity, mr. speaker, are lost forever. so if there's one thing we must not miss about this unspeakably evil episode, it is that kermit

gosnell is not an anomaly. he is the face of this murderous fortune 500 enterprise of killing helpless unborn children in the united states of america. and with all of the distortions and the bait and switch tactics opponents have hurled at the pain-capable unborn child protection act, leading up to this historic floor debate, the pain-capable unborn child protection act is very truly and simply a deeply sincere effort to protect both mothers and their pain-capable unborn babies entering their sixth month of gestation from heartless monsters like kermit gosnell. given the cataclysmic implications, mr. speaker, for any society who turns a blind eye to atrocities cruelly forced upon the most innocent and helpless of its members, would it be too much, would it be too much to hope for that members of this body and americans in general might research this

issue and learn the truth of it for themselves? because you see, mr. speaker, the real question in the debate before us is not whether these unborn children entering their sixth month of gestation are capable of feeling pain. he real question is, are we? if our society is to survive with our humanity in tact, our human compassion toward our fellow human beings must first survive. 50 million children, 50 million dead children are enough. that is why it's so important for people to see for themselves the humanity of these little victims and the inhumanity of what is being done to them. now, maybe it won't change everyone's mind, but it has changed so many minds. and the most of these changed minds share a common thread. they were confronted with the

brutal reality of abortion on demand and something inside them ould no longer deny the truth, they could no longer condone the murder of a defenseless child. hat changed their minds? perhaps i will really never understand what sparked that change in their hearts, mr. speaker. but i am convinced of one thing. that it is the same spark in the human soul that has turned the tide of blood and tragedy and hatred and inhumanity throughout human history. and whatever else it is, mr. man kind's only hope. yield back. mr. collins: i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced policy the nuary 3, 2013,

gentleman from new york, mr. jeffries, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. mr. jeffries: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include any extraneous materials into the record on subject of this special order. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. jeffries: mr. speaker, it's my honor and privilege once again to stand here on behalf of the congressional black caucus, to help anchor this special order, along with my good friend, the distinguished gentleman from the silver state, representative steven horsford. where for the next 60 minutes members of the congressional black caucus have an opportunity to speak directly to the american people about an issue of great significance as we kick off small business week in america and commemorate the 50th anniversary.

entrepreneurship, innovation, the capacity of americans who have an idea and want to translate that idea into a business initiative in urban america and rural america and suburban america is something that we here in the congress should not simply celebrate as we will do this week, but figure out ways to make sure that we can facilitate those entrepreneurial ideas in the most robust manner possible. and help those entrepreneurs from all over the country translate their ideas and their dreams into small business reality. it goes without saying that small businesses are the heart and soul of the american economy . a significant number of people

all throughout the country are on oyed in small businesses main street and throughout inner city commercial corridors and in the far reaches of rural america . and many of these small businesses we of course know will also hit -- were also hit extremely hard in the aftermath of the collapse of the economy in 2008. they were knocked down on the ground and it's our job in the congress and government, working with industry, to help lift those small businesses up off the ground, get them back on their feet so they can survive and thrive in the face of the economic difficulty that they confronted. ideas we'll be presenting related to entrepreneurship for small businesses throughout america, generally, and in the context of entrepreneurship and

innovation in the african-american community. and we're going to begin today with the distinguished gentleman from newark, new jersey, our good friend, representative donald payne, who is a distinguished member of the small business committee. prior to arriving in the congress, he worked hard on these issues and he's been a leader since being sworn in as a member of the house of representatives. it's my honor and my privilege to yield to representative ayne. mr. payne: i thank my colleague for this special order on entrepreneurship in the black community. since 1963, the president of the united states has issued a

proclamation a week which the country applauds entrepreneurs and small business owners. annually, we recognize the fact that though they are called small businesses, there is nothing small about the impact they have on the nation's economy. last year, small businesses created nearly 700,000 jobs, accounting for 40% of employment gains across companies of all sizes nationwide. so it is fair to say that small businesses are truly the backbone of our economy and entrepreneurship is still the primary pathway to realizing the american dream. this is particularly true in the black community. the harder the entrepreneurship is opportunity. and historically black entrepreneurship has meant opportunities for equality,

equity and a vehicle out of poverty. throughout the years, black entrepreneurs have harnessed economic power to strengthen the black community, create jobs and develop a voice to advocate for well-being of blacks in america. after the civil war, those employment prospects were slim for former ensaved men. issac myers organized ship corkers who lost their jobs in baltimore, created a union, bought a shipyard and provided employment for these men. walker maggie lena pooled her community's money to charter the penny savings bank. this bank was for and by the community and provided a safe

and courteous place to conduct business from the racism and harsh treatment often encountered in white-owned business. n 1906, dr. o.w. gurly, bought 40 acres of land in tulsa, oklahoma. he created and supported the businesses which attracted african-americans fleeing the oppression in mississippi. the area became known as black wall street and was the home to several prominent black businesses who created jobs and provided a safe haven for african-americans who were banned from other sections of the town. we well know that c.j. walker revolutionized black health care. however, she also used her financial power to contribute to

.nti-linching campaigns these are a few of the countless examples of black entrepreneurs who through their businesses and philanthropic efforts have empowered the black community their -- through their business efforts. and they continue today. it estimated that by the year 2015, black-buying power will be $1.1 trillion. in this economy where the black unemployment rate is double that of whites and the income and wealth income gap persistently ntersects with the race gap. black entrepreneurship is more important than ever in helping the community at-large. more than 60 cents of every dollar spent at local businesses

is recirculated into the local economy. so local black-owned businesses are a true asset to the community. as a member of the committee on small business, i have worked to strengthen the s.b.a.'s lending programs and increase access to capital for all populations, but especially minorities and women. i will be introducing two key pieces of legislation to assist small businesses as well. recognizing the nation's energy boom and green energy potential, this legislation will ensure that green small businesses have the resources to grow their business and hire more workers especially in low-income communities. this effort will help black businesses and the other marginalized populations remain competitive in the small business arena. small businesses and entrepreneurship fuel the engine

for economic growth and opportunity. for the black community, that means lower unemployment, higher college attendance and completion and strong outcomes for the present and the future. consequently, there is no time to waste in getting our small businesses up and running. i will continue to be outspoken -- outspoken advocate in encouraging entrepreneurs to pursue risks and their dreams and continue to be an integral part of growing this nation's economy. mr. speaker, before i take my seat, i would just like to talk a minute about my entrepreneurial experiences back my uncle 70's, when created a business in 1969 that manufactured computer forms, the old printed sheets that we used

to have that had the holes down the side. i'm sure some of us remember that that are old enough. we were the only african-american firm in newark, new jersey that manufactured computer forms. and the challenges that my uncle faced in business were great. he would have to pay for his raw materials ahead of time and not given the normal net 30 days or 60 days in order to manufacture your product and sell it. he had to come with a certified check. and there was no other reason than the color of his skin. so i understand what it is to be -- have your back against the wall in terms of trying to make it in this nation, but he persevered and we were in business for 20 years. so i'm very proud of that legacy that he left behind.

he was hiring people with handicaps back in those days. our forklift driver was actually hearing impaired, deaf, but he was a great worker, and he did not let that get in the way of him being a useful person in society and earning his way. we also in the 1970's were ahead of the curve in terms of hiring young men coming back from prison in the 1970's, far before re-entry was the word of the day. so i'm very proud of that legacy and heritage with urban data systems and that is why i feel so strongly about continuing to support small businesses throughout this nation. and i yield back the balance of my time. mr. jeffries: thank distinguished the gentleman from new jersey for so eloquently laying out the history of

entrepreneurship in america through the lenses of the black community and detailing his own experiences in newark, new jersey. experiences that were replicated in inner cities all across the country in the face of urban decay and abandonment. it was those african-americans who remained behind after inner city after inner city, with an entrepreneurial idea, providing service that otherwise may not have been available. and so we want to make sure we create opportunities for all americans to be able to grow their businesses and transform their ideas into reality. and i look forward and all the members of the c.b.c. look forward to working with

representative payne on the small business committee and the leadership he has demonstrated. we have now been joined by another distinguished member of the freshman class who has experience from a personal perspective as a successful small business owner and entrepreneur. so it's my owner right now to yield the floor to the distinguished gentlelady from ohio, representative joyce beatty. mrs. beatty: thank you. i rise this evening to discuss a very important topic to me, a topic that is important to me, to my district and to this nation, why entrepreneurialship matters to black america. this week, we celebrate national small business week, which gives us a chance to collectively recognize small businesses and the impact they have and have had on our local communities in

the nation. tonight, you will hear a lot about african-americans who started from humble means. african-americans who had great ideas and decided that they wanted to open a beauty shop, a barber shop, maybe a bakery or like my husband's family, a family restaurant. we'll hear the stories of how they became millionaires and billionaires. we heard about madam c.j. walker who started with a small idea and became the first african-american female millionaire. and we all know about the young lady in the state next to mine that grew up and wanted to be a radio announcer and 50 years ago, she had no idea that she'd be one of america's billionaire and that is oprah winfrey.

today is important to us not only as members of the congressional back caucus but important to us as a nation that we recognize those who spurred the economy. so often we think it is the large industrial operations that make up the businesses in this wonderful country. but if you thought about where do half of this nation work, they work in small businesses. they own small businesses. you see, small businesses in america has been the stable force in the economy. entrepreneurs are the backbone of creativity and production. small business is what stimulates the economic growth. 60% of all private sector non-farm jobs coming from small business. it is a proven fact that small businesses are critical to the

united states' economy. minority-owned businesses are also very important to the economy. the strong growth in owner income decreased in the amount of companies going bankrupt, is a great sign. self-employment figures are also growing in this nation. as a matter of fact, in the last year alone, small businesses created nearly 700,000 jobs, accounting for 40% of employment gains across companies of all sizes. you see, i know firsthand the value of being a small business owner, because for the past 20 years, i have been a small business owner. my husband is a small business owner. and we have been able to employ a diverse group of employees right in columbus, ohio,

providing our employees with stable wages and the opportunity for professional development. and for minority communities, small businesses are often the primary economic driver by employing those who are seniors, those who are unemployed, those who live right in the neighborhood or who have had some financial or work force development challenges. this is why we are here today and why it is so important in minority communities for small business administration to continue to develop programs which help minority small business owners break through the many barriers that prevent them their interest into the business community. but more can be done and more should be done to help support minority businesses, because in addition to the many economic benefits they provide, small

businesses also foster innovation, entrepreneurship and creativity. as a member of the financial services committee, i was pleased to learn that tucked within that broad package of financial industry reforms contained in the dodd-frank wall street reform and the consumer protection act law is a provision, a provision that mandates that each covered governmental agency establish an office of minority and women inclusion. the office of minority and women inclusion directors must develop and implement standards and procedures to ensure the maximum -- to the maximum extent post fair and inclusion utility lization of minority, -- utilization of minority, women and minimum-right owned businesses at all levels in the

agency, including procurement, insurance and all other types of contracts. so what i've decided to do is to hold a round-table discussion with minority and women-owned businesses through the leadership of our ranking member on financial services, congresswoman maxine waters. and i'm also so pleased that so many organizations like black enterprise recently partnered with nationwide insurance to hold its 2013 entrepreneurs conference right in my district in columbus, ohio, this past may. this conference provided a great platform for african-american entrepreneurs to share ideas, to be able to network and to grow heir business among some 1,200 participants. . . .

i think it's also important for us to know, as in my home state and many other home states, small business owners can take advantage of s.b.a. programs. in my district too, the ohio many loan guarantee program, which provides guarantees or fixed assets for small businesses for projects of $100,000 or less. also there is a many direct loan program which provides direct loans for businesses who are going to locate in ohio or who want to expand their business, to zem straight that they can create -- to demonstrate that they can create new ideas and new jobs for ohioans. it is very clear to me that small businesses will continue to grow, they'll grow our economy at a proven rate. while effective programs exist today to help minority-owned small businesses, i believe we can continue to do more.

i believe that's why my colleagues are here today, allowing us the opportunity to come and tell our stories, because it educates the public. it makes a difference. and that's why i am here. and i thank you so very much for allowing me the opportunity to come and talk about small businesses and more importantly to talk about small businesses that are owned by women and that are owned by african-americans, because we're making a difference. thank you and i yield back. mr. jeffries: i thank the distinguished gentlelady from ohio. certainly eloquently illustrated the point that small business and entrepreneurship are as american as baseball and apple pie. and for women and minority-owned businesses to thrive is for america to thrive. as has been pointed out by speaker after speaker. so many of the jobs that

are ans hold to this day as a result of the employment that small businesses provide. and so as we figure out how we can continue to recover from the great recession of 2008, it's critically important for us to ake sure that we can guarantee the best possible opportunity for small businesses to succeed and for entrepreneurial ideas to flourish. that is why we've taken to the floor today and it's my honor and my privilege to now yield to another distinguished member of the freshman class, my co-anchor for the c.b.c., special -- for the c.b.c. special order, the gentleman from the silver state, representative steven horsford. mr. horsford: good evening. let me first thank my good friend, the gentleman from the

empire state, the co-anchor, mr. jeffries. it has been a pleasure now for the first six months of our term in this 113th congress to work with you to bring these issues to the floor each week on behalf of the congressional black caucus. and i really have appreciated your friendship, your perspective and your intelligence on so many issues and i look forward to continuing to work with you and to my other colleagues, the dynamic freshman class, it's so great to have colleagues who work together, who have a likemindedness to represent our communities and to do it in a way that addresses the needs of all people and the gentlelady from ohio, mrs. beatty, has so many experiences from the private sector to her role working as an administrator

in the university, the ohio state university. it's just been great to get to know her as well as my good friend and colleague from new jersey, the gentleman, mr. payne . these are individuals that have great perspective and experience and whose voith voice on these issues are incredibly important and i'm just pleased to be among such a dynamic group that is trying to make a difference here in this 113th congress. and so today we are here to bring attention and focus to celebrating the 50th anniversary of national small business week. and it is fitting that tonight's special order hour will focus on how small businesses are critical to the growth of our economy. and as we do during these normal ours, people can follow us on

#cbctalk. if you have a question or an idea, if you have a perspective that you want heard, this is your opportunity because it's not just about us coming here, but it's about us listening to what it is our constituents want us to bring to the floor. as my colleagues have already said, small businesses are the backbone of our economy. the c.b.c. has fought and continues to fight to strengthen programs that create economic opportunity and foster entrepreneurship. over the last year, small businesses in our country have created 700,000 jobs. accounting for 40% of employment gains across companies of all sizes. more than half of all americans either own or work for a small business. so when we talk about increasing

access to capital, enhancing business partnerships and providing important technical assistance, the c.b.c. is talking about the small businesses who are the engines of our economy. and we have solutions and they're solutions that we hope our colleagues on the other side will work with us to pass. because they're the right solutions for america. solutions like representative rush's expanding opportunities for main street. so much focus is always on wall street. but we want to bring the issues of main street and small businesses to this body. whether it's representative richmond's microenterprise and youth entrepreneurship development act, making sure that we are helping new businesses and young entrepreneurs have the resources they need to start and grow

their business. or whether it's representative clarke's expanding opportunities for small businesses act. the c.b.c. is working on solutions. and these are the types of real policies that are before this body and we would urge our colleagues on both sides of the aisle to work with us to make sthees bills law -- to make these bills law. these bills, if enacted, would greatly enhance the small business landscape for minority entrepreneurs. i had an opportunity recently to visit the american history museum. and when you're there and you reflect on our history as a nation and you see the important contributions that african-americans have made to the establishment and growth of our great nation, whether it be in politics or government, civil rights or social justice, and,

yes, entrepreneurship, it's african-americans who have helped build our country and it's african-american businesses that need to be part of our plan for economic growth. three issues that i hear most from my constituents, small business owners, that i believe have to be at the center of our discussion as we celebrate the 50th anniversary of small business week is, number one, access to capital. whether it be on the need for lines of credit, to help with the day-to-day operations of a business, or capital loans to help a business buy new equipment so that they can expand our grow. the second issue is equal opportunity to bid on and win contracts. both in the private sphere, but most importantly also the

federal contracting opportunities. when i look at the amount of money that is being spent by these federal agencies, and to know that there are not -- they are -- there are not types of efforts to really provide outreach or support to our minority and women-owned and veteran-owned businesses is something that the congressional black caucus believes has to be a priority. and third is the need to ensure compliance with minority participation in federal contracting. this is an area, to my good friend from new york, i hope that we will be able to work on. i know the ranking member over small business, this is a priority of hers as well. and i want to see what we can do to hold accountable every agency to do their part to ensure that there's ample participation from all communities. in april i held my first small

business forum with my constituents. that focused on creating good-paying jobs through federal contracting opportunities. we held another one recently on access to capital. and it was the small business administration which was there that talked about the fact that they deliver millions of dollars of loans, contracts, counseling sessions and other forms of assistance to small businesses. well, we sought to replicate that type of support in our district with our small business owners. we had representatives from various agencies attend and they mapped out strategies for local businesses who are looking to grow and add more workers. we had representatives from agencies including the department of defense, the general service administration, the department of energy, the department of veteran affairs, the environmental protection

agency, and small business administration, as well as our governor's office of economic development. the forum provided a great opportunity to discuss our plan to create jobs in our local communities. over 60 local small business owners attended the event. along with representatives from federal agencies, other business owners help local residents and aspiring entrepreneurs figure out how to position themselves to compete for federal contracts and grants. those grants create jobs in our local community and job creation and economic growth is what we should be about as we talk about celebrating national small business owners week. my was most rewarding, to friend from new york, was a panel of young entrepreneurs. we had young people who are

still in high school, who have a business plan for how they can create everything from back p.c.a.s to -- backpacks to marketing to social marketing opportunities. and these are young people with ideas, with passion, with vision . but we want to make sure that they have the right support as well. so listening to those young people made me appreciate just how important these resources are and why we need to continue to work to make them a reality. let me finish my remarks at this point by talking about the need for business-to-business partnerships and making sure that we have these face-to-face meetings with those who know the ins and outs of securing grants, those who know how to go about contracting and also the need

for access to capital and how to secure the loans that small businesses need to grow their business. we want to encourage those who on listening or following us #cbctalks to attend one of the small business administration's matchmaking events during small business week. there are several, there's one in seattle, there's one in dallas, st. louis, pittsburgh and even here in the nation's capital, in washington, d.c. and to reach out to resources like black enterprise. they have a very successful young entrepreneurs conference that they hold annually that helps young people learn about the opportunities of starting their small business and what it means to develop a plan to do marketing, to have all of their plans in place so that their business once launched is successful.

finally i want to encourage people to join their black chamber of commerce because these are opportunities to tect to resources, get the support they need and help to grow their businesses. so i yield back to the gentleman from new york at this time and thank him and the other members for this spotlight on small business week. >> the gentleman made several important points, if i could -- mr. jeffries: the gentleman made several important points. if i could just say, we hear a lot about the evils of regulation that talk is put forth in very generalized terms without being able to point to specific regulations that actually are impeding the growth and opportunities of small businesses but it's certainly something that we hear a lot about. the evils of regulation. but the reality is, if you realy

want to deal with some of the problems confronting small businesses in america, i think representative horsford has laid it out in pretty compelling ways. one, we need to ensure that our small businesses have access to capital. in order to be able to grow their businesses, allow them to flour, and expand. build upon the ideas that exist. two, we've got to make sure we give small businesses access to contracting and procurement opportunities. many times there are small businesses that have the capacity to do the job but are unaware of the opportunities that actually exist, whether that's at the federal government level, the state government level or down at the knews any pal or count we governmental level. lastly as my good friend representative horsford pointed out, we've got to make shoor

that we provide access to technical assistance to deal with the plines issue hs that businesses confront. that doesn't mean that all of these issues are overly burdensome or unnecessary, but we want to make sure that small businesses do have the passity to operate within the regulatory framework that is applicable and reasonable and that the elected officials and whatever the particular -- in whatever the particular jurisdiction have deemed necessary for the proper functioning of a small business. i thank the dwisht gentleman from nevada for raising those very compelling points. we have now been joined by a very important leader on the issue of small business and entrepreneurship who comes from the great state of new york, the great borough and county of

kings in brooklyn, where we have many entrepreneurs and she's helped many businesses over time, she is on the small business committee, she's my neighbor, so i wanted to make sure i gave her the appropriately generous introduction, it's an honor to yield the floor to the distinguished gentlelady from new york, congresswoman yvette clarke. ms. clarke: let me thank you, mr. speaker, and i'd like to thank my colleague, mr. horsford of nevada, and my colleague and neighbor from brooklyn, new york, the honorable congressman hakim jeffries for yielding their time and for their tremendous leadership, week in, and week out, in providing a view into the congressional brack caucus perspective on the issues of this day.

mr. speaker, it has been nearly five years since or nation experienced the worse financial calamity since the great depression. however, as our economy continues to recover, unemployment remains stubbornly high. with g at 7.5% nationally 9% loyment at 13.2% and respectively for african-americans and latino americans. as a member of the house small business committee, i know the challenges facing our nation's minority owned small businesses and entrepreneurs. from access to capital, a problem for minority-owned and disadvantaged small businesses in the best of economic times, or a lack of access to knowledge and information of the available options to assist them. i understand that we must --

that we must work increasingly and unceasingly to ensure that even as the media focuses on the booming stock market, that our nation's real job creators are not forgotten, not marginalized and overlooked. their success is vital, not only for more robust recovery, but it to fully addressing our nation's national employment crisis. ironically enough, mr. speaker, this week is the 50th commemoration of national small business week. it appears, though, that the republican-led house is totally tone deaf to the millions of americans still unable to find gainful employment. that not one of the bills before the house this week support job creation, real job creation, nor do they rescind the harmful

effects of the sequester which by almost every measure has been clearly detrimental to our nation's economy and is tantamount, it is tantamount to negligence. in my capacity as a member of the small business committee, i have worked with my colleagues to promote all small businesses, especially minority, women, and veteran-owned small businesses in my district and across the nation, as they troy to navigate the self-imposed and manufactured uncertain economic times. i am a strong supporter of the program that provides technical assistance necessary for small businesses in uns served communities to just get off the ground. i also work with the s.b.a. and the s.b.a. office of advocacy to ensure that all the firms who qualify for s.b.a. contracting

and access are provided an equal opportunity for participation. mr. speaker, i have the honor and privilege of representing brooklyn's ninth congressional district. my constituency includes an extremely large small business community with commerce corridors lined from block to block, with small mom and mop businesses and store fronts. these unique communities provide the foundation of not only the economic but the unique special fabric of brooklyn. we must build on this foundation in brooklyn-new york and across our great nation. every day that the house majority focuses the people's time on issues that divide us is another day that our small businesses are treated as a subordinate concern.

it is another day that our nation's job seekers spend job searching in vain, looking for the proverbial needle in the hay stack and another day that our nation will have to wait for the engine that powers our economy to be firing on all cylinders. mr. speaker, as our nation celebrates national small business week, i look forward to a genuine debate that addresses the totality of our nation's small business community and not cherry picking the low hanging fruit. i'd like to thank the congressional black caucus, who like -- who, like myself, treat every week as small business week. for focusing on this crucially important issue and for having me this evening. and in closing, i just want to share with you that as we go through the immigration debate, that we acknowledge that

oftentimes in the black community, much of our entrepreneurial spirit is found in those entrepreneurs who have come to the united states and find a nearby market where they can -- a niche market where they can provide goods, services, and products to people from their homes of origin and by extension to the rest of the nation. i had the distinct honor and privilege of meeting a gentleman who immigrated -- emigrated to the united states from the island nation of jamaica. one of the great delicacies, and they've become nationally renowned, is called the beef patty this gentleman's name is none other than lowell hawthorne he started with a small store front in the bronx, new york, and has now grown that store front into a franchise

opportunity that has made him, his family, and all those who have engaged very wealthy individuals, created job opportunities for hundreds of people, and provided one of the most delicious delicacies one can ever taste. lowell hawthorne, truly an entrepreneur who has availed himself of support from the s.b.a. and has been able to grow his business. this is a success str story that can be modeled and pat erned after and we need to make sure that those who have those ideas, that are innovative, that are creative, entrepreneurs, get the support they need to continue to build this great country of ours. i'd like to thank my colleagues for anchoring this -- my colleague for anchoring this c.b.c. special order and i'd like to ask for unanimous consent to enter the statement

of congresswoman, the gentlelady from texas, ms. eddie bernice johnson into the record, she is -- she has sent a statement on the 50th anniversary or 50th annual national small business week and with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's statement will be included in the record pursuant to general leave. mr. jeffries: i thank the gentlelady from new york for her thoughtful and insightful remarks and thank her for pointing out that immigrants from the great state of new york and immigrants who have come from across the world to states all across the united states are hardworking, family-oriented, entrepreneurial, innovative individuals who have helped to revive and rejuvenate communities all across this great land. and it's something that we in this chamber need to recognize as we celebrate and commemorate

small business week and prepare to move forward hopefully with some form of comprehensive immigration reform. that we recognize the cricks that immigrants have made in the small business context. we've been joined by another champion of small businesses here in the congress, got a very distinguished record on a wide variety of issues, she's been a thoughtful, elegant, and passionate voys as it relates to entrepreneurship in america and specifically within the black community, it's my honor and privilege now to yield the floor to the distinguished gentlelady from the great lone star state of texas, representative sheila jackson lee. ms. jackson lee: let me thank my

colleague who have gathered here tonight, thank you congressman jeffries for the combined leadership of yourself, mr. horsford of nevada and of course my dear, dear friend, congressman don payne, congresswoman yvette clarke and i know that the gentlelady from ohio was also contributing this evening and i certainly thank her for her leadership. i am very pleased to be able to stand here and honor a group that i frankly believe are the anchor of the economy for the united states of america and that is small businesses. we look at the landscape of american history, we did not start with multinationals, international corporations. we really started with mom and pop businesses whether it is in fact when we were told in the historical concept to go west, young man, and woman, and those

from the 13 colonies originally as they move from the east coast o explore the west as far as california. in those pioneers towns, you had to have small businesses. then, of course, we speak about the history of our community, first coming to this nation as slaves, but then developing artisan skills in the spirit of booker t. washington, being carpenterers and painters and bricklayers. if you look at the history of the southmark of the african-americans, this was their business eark long with funeral home arkse long with restaurants, i remember the aunt of my husband, it was one of our special treats to be able to go down to aunt francest' location in alabama, her store was near the alabama state and it was the place to go. it was also a little hotel. and there was no doubt that aunt frances could cook but she turned it into a business.

and the students knew that was a place that she -- that was a comfort to them, good meals could be gotten for reasonable prices. those were small businesses in the african-american community. and frankly, i believe we have not done well by them. we have not done well by minority businesses overall, by women-owned businesses. yes, there are some moments of success that i'll recount in just a moment but in terms of the federal government really putting elbow grease to the idea of outreach, to minority businesses, they can do better. yes, we have the small business administration and there are many instances of outreach but let me share with you how we can do better. first of all, we can eliminate the sequestration, we can put on the floor h.r. 900, legislation that many of us signed, led by john conyers, i'm an original co-sponsor among many others. eliminate the sequestration, it is killing us.

it is killing small businesses. it's killing the opportunity for small businesses in terms of small businesses who do small amount of business with the federal government. all of that is being cut. we can we can fix the internal revenue service. if you poll your small businesses, s-corporations or any of those moms and pops or any of those individuals who have businesses in their name, i can assure you that there is a difficult situation with i.r.s. audits. they seem to find small businesses and seem to find minority businesses. we as a congress, we want fairness. we certainly want the i.r.s. that has hard-working workers, but we want them to find the right space to be able to allow our small businesses not to suffocate but to grow and work with them in what we call offer

and compromise. and we need to fix the issue of credit scoring, allowing the small businesses to access, if you will, the right kind of credit. if they can get credit, then they can grow. and i would imagine if this whole place was filled up with small businesses, and i ask them -- the colleagues that are in this room, it was all filled up with small businesses, ask them to raise their hands about access to credit or the whole issue of credit scoring and we in the federal government can do better and do better with a fixed tax system that allows small businesses to grow their businesses a than grow. let me also say as i bring my remarks to a close and i want to say to congressman clarke who is already on the floor, she knows i have to cite some of my bestes that have come and made a great

opportunity for workers, but let me just say that we need to be say it -- how shall i encourage, encourage all these government agencies -- dune how much the general services administration buys and how much they build? all of these agencies, every single bill that comes through here, we should work with our republican colleagues who believe in small businesses to add amendments that deals with and treach, minority women-owned businesses. they're intimidated doing business with the federal government. and the general services administration is one of the worst offenders. they spend money on buying buildings and their record is horrific and what they say is, they don't have a provision that incentivizes, no provision in their structure that causes them mwbe. e forward on w

maybe we could do it to address the question of an agency that buys everything, builds everything for the federal government and they don't have an incentive. just last week, i put an amendment on the defense authorization and i thank the democrats and republicans being supportive. i look forward to working with them on the agricultural bill. i'm grateful we are highlighting small businesses today and i hope we list add few items that we hear your voices and tell us how to help you better, i.r.s., sequestration or working with the general services administration so you have more opportunity to participate as a small business. let me cite a few of my businesses as i go to my seat in texas. i want to celebrate frenchey that has been in the chicken frying business for

50-years-plus. they have taken that business and in the marketing business of making food products that they are selling to grocery stores. they have grown from being that place where the students from texas southern university would go and the rest of us would go by expanding. they kept people hired for 50 years. their mother is still alive and the children has kept it alive and i salute them because it is a business of the family. came from louisiana. want to salute the only-standing energy company owned by an african-american and a pipeline company, milt ton carroll, precision instruments for a number of years who was in the oil-drilling business. i want to salute cool runnings, to makeon restaurant, has taken their -- macon restaurant and

has taken their restaurant and the takeout business is great. i salute the houston black expo, because they are having their big event on june 21, and businesses all over houston will be benefiting from mr. love's great effort in the houston black expo. finally, i want to conclude by saying that small businessesr in fact, the backbone of america. i know that there will be a great opportunity for us to expand on that. let me close by thanking you mr. jeffries, and mr. horsford for highlighting what is truly the infrastructure of jobs in america, small businesses and minority-owned businesses and women-owned business. i yield back. mr. jeffries: i thank the gentlelady from texas for an eloquent and thoughtful remark and putting forth some important

policy prescriptions for what we in the congress can do to help advance the agenda on behalf of small businesses across this country and the women and minority-owned business context. i'm thankful that are representative clarke mentioned one of the important immigrant businesses that began in the bronx, new york, but has spread ll across the country, the golden crust bakery and grill, as well as i think the distinguished the gentlewoman from texas for highlighting some of the important businesses that have sprouted up in houston, texas. those are just a few examples of hat entrepreneurs in the black immigrant community and african-american community have done all across the land and all we're saying is we want to make sure that we provide these

businessmen and women the same opportunities that others throughout time in america have had, because if we do, they will be able to translate their entrepreneurial spirit, their innovative ideas, their vision into reality that will make economic sense for their communities and lead to the hiring of american citizens and others who need the employment opportunity that these small businesses will continue to generate. just a few observations in closing. one of the things that was mentioned earlier today on the floor was the fact that many small businesses confront an uncertain economic environment. and as a result of this uncertainty, they are unable to move forward in any concrete fashion because they don't know when the next crisis will hit

our economy. are we going to default on our debt? are we going to fall over the fiscal cliff? how long are we going to be dealing with sequestration? i would suggest to my good friends on the other side of the aisle that if we really want to help out small businesses and entrepreneurs, we have to figure out a way to come together and find common ground as it relates to moving our economy forward, because as long as we're in this period of uncertainty, it will be difficult for small businesses and for entrepreneurs to take any step forward as it relates to growing their businesses and allowing them to be more prosperous. as a vehicle for us to try and find common ground. for four years, my good friends on the other side of the aisle were complaining about the fact that we were not in regular order, that the senate failed to

pass a budget. well this year, a budget resolution was passed in the house of representatives, a budget resolution was passed in the senate, two very different visions for where we should go as a country, but the vehicle to find common ground is to move forward with a conference committee. the majority in the senate has indicated they're prepared to move forward and appoint conferees, but the speaker of the people's house refuses to do so, even though for the last four years, folks were complaining about the absence of regular order. if you want to do something about small businesses, what we should do in america is figure out how we in the congress can come together, find common ground, create some economic certainty so these entrepreneurs can move forward.

i don't know if my good friend has any parting comments, but let me just say we in the c.b.c. are committed to continuing to stand up for entrepreneurship in america for opportunity, for the full pursuit of the american dream through innovation and we extend an olive branch to members of the other side of the aisle on this issue and on all other issues so we can finally find a way to come together and move this economy forward in a way that should benefit all americans. and with that, i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. with respect to a unanimous consent request entered earlier the chair will qualify under the name member

cannot remove a name and reports it to the house and discharge. h.r. 1797 is currently on the union calendar and any request to remove a co-sponsor at this point may not be entertained. under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2013, chair recognizes the gentleman from hultgren. r. mr. hultgren: i ask unanimous consent for all members to have five legislative days to include extraneous material. i wish you and other of our colleagues had a happy father's day yesterday. it is one of the most important things for fathers and mothers to be able to provide for their families. mr. speaker, i would like to

talk about what for many americans is the most pressing or depressing issue our country is facing right now. jobs, unemployment and the need to create more jobs. but while we as a nation face challenges, the road map to prosperity is clear. the question is will we act on the recommendations of those who create the jobs that drive our national economy, america's small businesses and entrepreneurs. as i speak the unemployment rate in the united states stands at 7.6%. according to the american enterprise institute, just 64.4% of working-aged men are employed, the lowest level by far since the great depression and astounding five percentage points lower than at the beginning of the current downturn. a staggering 4.4 million workers have been out of work for 27 weeks or longer. in illinois, my home state, the

unemployment rate is even higher at 9.3%. the unemployment rate in my home state has been at or above 8.6% since april of 2009. 611,people are currently out of work in illinois. according to the bureau of labor and statistics, 26.3 million part-time workers, 7.8 million are working for economic reasons, meaning the job market wasn't robust enough to support full-time positions. jobs, unemployment, job growth, all of these are issues on the minds of americans because directly or indirectly, all americans are affected by them. . when i meet with people all over my district, i ask what would it

take for you to create one more job, not 50 jobs or 100 job, but just one more job. an they tell me the best way to spur job creation and economic growth is to reduce government regulations, cut taxes and simplify the tax code and reduce the size of government by cutting spending. having a full-time, stable job and going to work every day is necessary just to meet the challenges of daily living. american pocketbooks are pummeled every day. take gas prices, for instance. the nationwide average price for a gallon of gas has jumped by more than a dollar in the last four year, from $2.58 in june of 2009 to $3.64 in june of this year. the price of gas in illinois right now is averaging $4.08 a gallon. that's 15 cents per gallon higher than this time last year. and in chicago area, in my district, prices are higher. the average price for a gallon

of regular gas is a ridiculous $4.28. this is just one example of how everyday life is becoming less and less affordable. for ordinary americans. creating good, full-time jobs must be our priority. but small business owners in my district tell me that in the current business climate, this is difficult if not impossible, for them to do. jeff, the president of a small industrial company is not hiring, he would like to, but he says he can't. he says that business owners have to be optimistic that the business environment will be suitable for business growth. he goes on to say, however, the unfriendly business climate coming from washington and the huge deficit spend regular deuces optimism that the business climate will continue to improve or even remain stable. jeff also says government

regulation an high taxation create uncertainty and government regulation and infration lair -- inflationary policies are driving up the cost of hiring the primary resource of business needs is employees. then there's tom, the president of a raw materials distribution company in my district who says the biggest thing holding me back from hiring is uncertainty of the future business climate. tom said, we have already seen health care costs encrease nearly 20% year over year in early 2013, which was on top of the 12% increase in 2012. tom also stated and i quote, we pay for 75% of the cost of health care for our employees. the parts of health care legislation yet to be implemented will probably penalize us even more for doing the right thing. we do not understand how health care legislation will impact our business, end quote.

the recommendations of those who create small businesses in -- jobs in this country, the engines of our economy, are critical to increasing employment and spurring growth in our national economy. reducing the regulatory burden on small businesses is one critical factor toward inducing them to hire more workers. the burdensome nature of proposed federal regulation is making long-term planning for businesses and growth virtually impossible. an ability -- an inability to plan is having an affect on an effect on hiring. according to the national federation of independent businesses, in the last three 3rks369 re have been new regulations, an average of 74 regulations a day. nfib says in the last three

months, there have been 6,669 regulatory changes, or notices, posted on the regulatory website, an average of 74 regulations every single day this regulatory morass forces small businesses to hold on to any extra revenue they may have for fear of new compliance costs. this means forgoing opportunities to invest or hire new workers. some businesses are forced to close altogether. a recent poll of the national association of manufacturers and the national federation of independent business found that 52% of small business owners said the united states' own regulation, rules, and taxes impact their businesses more negatively than foreign competition. so our own regulation, according to a majority of business owners, is more harmful to them or more threatening to them than foreign competition.

small businesses are the engine of our nation's economy. they create about 2/3 of new jobs in the united states. they employee more than half of the private sector work force. we need to unleash their potential. so what can be done? we must require regulatory authorities to review their regulations for usefulness and relevance and amend them as necessary to get rid of them if they are obsolete. i have introduced legislation to do just that. h.r. 309, the regulatory sunset and review act, requires federal agencies to regularly review regulation on their books and establish a process to sunset those that are duplicative, conflicting, or no longer necessary. small businesses need a seat at the table at the earliest stages of crafting regulation. too often regulators generating rules have little or no contact with the businesses affected by those regulations.

ey implement and thus -- affected by those regulations they implement and thus no con soacht the costs of regulations. they need to know the cost of regulations including how they affect job loss and job creation using the best tools an adopt only those regulations whose benefits outweigh the costs. sharing certain reasons why public input was not included and disclosing the processes and data are important to restoring trust resm deucing red tape is critical but cutting taxes and implementing meaningful tax reform that incentivizes businesses to hire are also key to job growth.

when taxes are lower, businesses invest their resources and hire more workers. when taxes are lower, tax paying citizens are able to keep more of their own money, to spend as they see fit, to save or invest. congress must consider the impact tax policy is having on small business' ability to succeed when small businesses are a primary source of job creation in the united states and the engines of economic growth. small businesses, those with less than 500 employees, represent 99.7% of all employers and employee almost half of the private sector labor force, 55 million workers. in illinois, again, my home state, small businesses represent 98.3% of all employers and provide jobs to 2.4 million workers, about half of the private labor force. so when it comes to economic and tax policy, we need to listen to main street small businesses and

mom and pop shops. that create the jobs in this country. and this is what they're saying when it comes to taxes and spending. 91% of small businesses find that the tax code is complicated enough to hire their own tax preparer. 5% think congress should revise the tax code. 81% think government should cut spending before ever considering tax increases. 78% want to close tax loopholes and 71% agree that tax reform should include lowering the tax burden on small businesses. thus to enable small businesses to create jobs and improve the employment climate in this country taxes must be low. high tax rates are a problem for small businesses because they siphon off revenue owners need to reinvest for growth and to create jobs. so what needs to be done. implementation of the comprehensive tax reform that

makes the tax code fairer, less burdensome, and more comprehensive for the folks who pay taxes and the small businesses that invest in hiring. pemple innocent repeal of the estate or death tax which i have long advocated is critical for small businesses and for maintaining a healthy jobs climate. many small businesses are family owned, the death tax is a major impediment for such businesses to keep operating in a down economy when the owner retires or dies. protecting small businesses from death tax is important to keep main street businesses operating for future generations and preserving their ability to create jobs as we grow this economy. we should cut taxes to spur investment in hiring. lower tax rate, lower the cost of capital and increase the reward of -- the risk-reward that businesses take in hiring new workers. i support increasing the small

business expensing limit so businesses can recover their cost that they invest -- and invest in their business in hiring new workers. we must simplify the tax code. it's too complicated when nine out of 10 small businesses must hire someone to prepare their own taxes. making the tax code easier to understand and follow and not placing new reporting burdens on small businesses will help them focus on growing their businesses and creating jobs. so in addition to reducing regulatory burdens and cutting taxes, eliminating wasteful spending and reducing the size of government is key to job growth. current trends have government spending continuing to hover at 22% of gross domestic product for the next 0 years. 22% of g.d.p. continuing spending adds to the 16.6 -- adds to the $16.6 trillion debt that in turn drives up interest costs to pay

for borrowing. c.b.o. estimates that interest pate on the national debt as a percentage of the overall budget will more than double from the current 6.2% of the budget to 14.1%, consuming an ever larger share of federal resources. clearly, we do need to cut spending relative to the overall federal budget. cutting spending reduces the amount of money government takes from the private economy. cutting spending and reducing the size of government relative to the private sector keeps more money in the private sector where it can be put to productive use such as hiring and creating jobs. cutting wasteful spending and balancing our national budget will absolutely help job growth. it's simple. the federal government should not spend money that it takes in if we want to -- more money -- spending more than we take in if we want to create an environment conducive to job creation. i have adovo kated for support

of the budget my house colleagues passed this spring that balancing the budget in 10 years by cutting spending and fixing our broken tax code so it's fairer and simpler for everyone. i also support and have worked hard to pass a balanced budget amendment to the constitution requiring the federal government to live within its means and balance spending with the money it takes in just as families in illinois and across america have to do will instill fiscal discipline required to get our economy moving in the right direction. this will also promote confidence and create certainty within our nation's private sector businesses so they can take productive steps toward hiring workers and growing their businesses. according to the small businesses i meet in my district, there are many things we can do to spur job creation in this country. we can hope up american markets overseas. new markets mean greater demand for american made goods. the businesses that manufacture these products will hire workers

to meet the demand. in that regard, i have voted in favor of free trade agreements with countries such as colombia and panama and south korea. i've also supported permanent normal trade relations with russia in order that american manufacturers can receive the benefits of open markets as a result of russia joining the w.t.o. we also must eliminate the bureaucracy that hinders the development of american products. bureaucracy should not stand in the way of american innovation and bringing products to market. i'm a co-spon so far the protect small business jobs act. this legislation would provide small businesses with a limited grace period to correct violations and if the violation is corrected in a timely manner allowers in waiver of any sanctions against the small businesses. this will help business owners like tom, who referred to one federal regulatory authority with which he was dealing and tom said, and i quote, rather than working with the industry

to fix alleged issues, it is imposing significant fines right off the bat, without giving companies the opportunity to first fix the concerns, end quote. government should be a facilitator not an on stackle to new product development and job creation. mr. speaker, the pathway to a growing economy and putting people become to work is clear. the small business job creators in my district and around the country have spoken clearly, they want to get rid of burdensome and unnecessary red tape, they want lower taxes and simpler tax codes that lend to certainty and encourage growth in investment and they want the federal government to exercise fiscal discipline and serve as a facilitator for american innovation, product development and marketing. we can get americans back to work. america is the land of opportunity with aspiration and diligence, anyone can achieve

their dreams. let's redouble our efforts and renew our commitment to our fellow citizens to help them build a bright future for themselves, their children and for this nation. mr. speaker, i yield back the alance of my time. the chair: the -- the speaker pro tempore: the chair would entertain a motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. accordingly the house stands

bill since it was marked off and approved. why was this language added? >> it was announced last friday they would be adding an

exception to the bill for rape and. originally, it would be a ban on all abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, with the exception of pregnancies that threatened the life of the woman. now they are adding language for women for abortions in the case of rape and. there was a dustup at the markup. the sponsor of the bill said oft abortions in the case rape were rare. he explained as the market went on that what he meant was that abortions after 20 read -- weeks as a result of rape were rare. democrats ran with it and created a fuss so they decided they would at the language to the bill, even though the amendment failed at the markup. they have decided also not to less -- to let the congressman frank's handle it on the floor. a member oft even

the judiciary committee, the committee the bill emerged from. ?> why is it happening >> the republicans are sensitive. last year, todd akin, who was running for senate, also made comments about the unlikelihood of getting pregnant after a rape and he ended up losing his race, even though he was a prohibitive favorite at the time. republicans are sensitive to this thing and when congressman franks made the comment, even though it has been taken a little bit out of context, they were sensitive to that. i wondered why marsha blackburn would be managing the bill when she is not on the committee. realized, there is not a republican on the judiciary committee. they did not have a woman to manage the bill, they had to turn to somebody else in order to get a woman republican to manage the bill. >> this is a republican sponsored bill. what has been reaction from democrats? >> they hate it. they point out it is facially unconstitutional, which

republicans do acknowledge. the supreme court has been clear on this that abortions cannot be banned before fetal viability, around 23 weeks and later of pregnancy. since this reaches back to 20 weeks, an appeals court just a few weeks ago struck down a similar arizona law. what they are hoping by pushing the bill forward, in addition to asing a political statement to how much americans do not like abortions later in pregnancy, what they are saying is they are hoping that, if it should pass and get to the supreme court, unlikely given the makeup of the senate and the fact the president is unlikely to sign it, should they somehow get it to the supreme court, they are hoping the supreme court would use the law to change its mind about this. as it stands now, this violates current supreme court precedent on abortion. >> let's go back to the house

judiciary committee markup last week. what was the debate like? >> testy. the house just -- the committee has been through this a lot. there was a similar bill last year that only applied to the district of columbia. the justification they say is that scientists have suggested that 20 weeks of pregnancy is when a fetus can begin to feel pain. that is a scientifically disputed. but that is the justification. the judiciary committee had a applying to the district of columbia, which they can, but the house put it on the floor and put it under the suspension of the rules, which requires two thirds of the majority and it did not pass or get the supermajority needed. this bill is coming with a rule, it only needs a simple majority. it is considered much more likely the bill will pass. democrats were at the markup and wewent up to similar that

have seen over the year, the republicans talking about how harmful the abortion is and how much the american public does not like it, and democrats thinking about the woman and how the constitution and the supreme court currently guarantees the woman the right to choose and talking about difficult situations, particularly later in pregnancy when women, in difficult medical situations, should have this right. >> the bill is coming up tuesday. you said it will pass. who are you watching more closely echo >> this generally tends to be a fairly republican- democratic split. there are a lot of democrats from the south and not exclusively, democrats who vote antiabortion. this is a big issue when the affordable care act came up. many democrats were worried about abortion votes and wanting to maintain an antiabortion voting record. many got voted out in 2010.

there are not quite as many as there used to be. it is largely a partyline issue but not exclusively. there are considerably fewer republicans who vote with abortion rights backers these days. that has become much rarer. i would love to see if there are any of those. i would be interested to see this particular bill because it does, as i mentioned, violate current supreme court precedent. it will be interesting to see how many republicans are willing to go out on a limb. this is stretching the bounds of how far you can go on and abortion bill. and still be considered within the realms of what the public really supports. >> what is likely to happen in the senate if the bill does pass the house? >> it is hard to say. i do not think they would take up the bill as it is. i could see someone trying to attach this to another bill and try to force a vote to force some of the democrats from some

toughse democrats in races, to have to take a vote on this to make this a difficult vote. i could definitely see that happen. >> how about the obama administration? what is their take? >> i do not think they have said as of now but it would be hard to imagine the president supporting this bill or doing anything except promising to veto it. policyhealth correspondent from npr, thank you for your time. class coming up, author john roberts on the first ladies. that that is followed by the new energy secretary on efforts to reduce the nation's dependency on oil. later, president obama speaks to students in ireland. following season one of c-span series "first ladies: influence .nd image" our series continues

one hour. >> i wanted to ask a question. before i do that, i prefaced it by saying i would like to get a show of hands from people. , am i could take a look just right for the season? [laughter] maybe in florida. anybody who things i am, raise your hands. anybody who thinks it is premature? thank you. welcome to the world of first ladies. generally, when we look at first ladies, we talked about in terms of their fashion sense, whether it is mainly eisenhower's famous pink, and we think about how they have influenced society and think about them as white house hostesses and we pay more

attention to things like how they dress and whether they are appropriately dressed and how much power they have over the events that shape our future and country. when i started to write about first ladies, i decided i was more interested in a distant -- different aspect of their job in the white house. i was not so much interested in finding out how they entertained, what they did at state dinners, but i wanted to know how they have shaped history, how did they work as part of the political partnership. and were they in fact political partners? or were first ladies really just social appendixes to the presidency. the historical record is a bit mixed. as you look at first ladies, you can find a tremendous amount of information about what they served at a state dinner, how they rated the centerpieces on the table, what kind of clothing they wore. we know when harriet lane was had 100ed, her dress

yards of lace in it, if you can imagine. i cannot quite figure out, how do you get 100 yards of lace into a dress but she did it. she had artificial flowers woven into her hair. we know what her makeup was like. all of this information was chronicled back in the 19th century and is preserved in newspapers and books published 1881, when wes had the first comprehensive book on first ladies to ever appear. is the harder to find role that first ladies had in shaping contemporary events in political campaigns. it is there. because i am a campaign animal, i started out in politics, as pat mentioned, quite early. i loved it. i got the political bug. i wanted to know what these ladies did on campaigns. the first place i looked. the reason is because i had

experienced a first lady on a campaign in 1980 and i knew they are not passive partners, at least not the one i work for. [laughter] , who is one of my favorite first ladies, was a strong, assertive partner in a political marriage. from thed that way first time ronald reagan ran for governor until his final reelection campaign. she made80 campaign, her influence felt everywhere. those of us who worked on the staff knew well she had a point of view about his schedule, the activities of where he went and what he said. she shaped the speeches and she had a point of view regarding the press and that -- and how they treated her and how they treated him and she had favorites and enemies. our job was to know the difference and make sure we ran a campaign that reflected the way they, as a couple, wanted it

to be run. i was fairly certain this was probably not a unique phenomenon, that, if i look hard, i would find first ladies had a hand in a lot of other interesting things in our history. there are so many i cannot begin to get into, but the one area i want to focus on tonight is skeletons and scandals and how first ladies handle political crises. areall the political crises about close but some of them are. anyone who remembers the early 1980s knows how much trouble nancy reagan got into over close. , it is kind on it of a silly thing that her poll ratings became so negative just over the issue of assignor clothing in the white house. i was reading an article the other day about the oscars. it turns out the clothes and purse designers and accessory designers fight to get a celebrity to carry their product.

there is a whole industry that is sprung up about creating gift rooms in hotels where the celebrities stay at the oscars and the celebrities can come in and pick up any freebies they want. things are many given away to them in the hopes they will wear it once and be photographed that the irs is talking about trying to figure out what the value of that is so they can tax them for it. back in 1981, when nancy reagan got in trouble over designer crowes -- clothes that were lent to her but not returned, it was a serious political matter. she was not the first. going back to mary lincoln, clothes had been a problem for women in the white house. i do not know if we have any there was one time, in a single month, when she heads and 1000 pairs of gloves.

left the white house, she was terribly in debt. she was getting these clothes from merchants all around dc on credit. stand her staff out to beat up on the merchants to get them to forgive the debt. be paid.ed to she ended up trying to auction off her clothes after she left the white house. she was in many ways one of the most fascinating first ladies simply because of the multiple aspects of arson alley that were dysfunctional -- aspects of personality that were dysfunctional. who mighto suitors have been presidents, both douglas and lake and and she chose lincoln because she felt he was the one who could win -- ellis and lincoln and she chose lincoln because she felt he was

the one who could win. she made julia grant back away from her in a room as if she were royalty. you never turn your back on royalty. she may have had problems with close and money and spending, but they never amounted to a political crisis in her presidency. i call it her presidency because i think it really was. she was absolutely a partner in that undertaking. meetingsn on cabinet and made recommendations on when to hire and fire cabinet members. she was very much involved in the day-to-day aspects of his political career and his governance. i began to wonder if this was true in the 19th century. going as far back as abigail

adams and martha washington, you find that first ladies laid an active role in the white house and in the campaigns that it took to get there. have a gail adams was a campaign strategist for her husband -- abigail adams was a campaign strategist for her husband. they would talk incessantly about all addicts of the day,, legislation that needed to be passed, -- when he needed to do to win more support. iss hidden history, to me, one of the most fascinating and overlooked areas of presidential history. i'm drawn parts that to very much are the aspects of political crisis and how people get through a bad crisis. when you think about political

crises come i think impeachment is about at the top of the list. i don't know if any of you read -- if any of you followed the recent impeachment trial in the senate, but i was not familiar with the earlier impeachments, like the johnson impeachment in the 19th century. some of karl johnson, it turns out, was an adviser to her husband much in the way that hillary clinton was to bill clinton in the more recent impeachment. i was in washington during that impeachment to do tv shows. when i read what happened in the johnson presidency, i was struck by the similarities between hillary and eliza. time in the a reef civil war, been a war refugee

here -- for a brief time in the civil war, been a war refugee. lincoln at first gave him a governorship and then later made him vice president. for eliza johnson and the family, at the time he was first made a territorial governor for lincoln, she was in confederates occupied territory in tennessee. for about two months, she had to get across the lines. her family would sleep in barnes and on the roadside. they would get to a point where two armies would meet only to be turned back by confederate commanders and have to find another way through. eventually, she managed to reunite with her husband. a tough woman. this is not the kind of woman who would easily give up in an impeachment crisis. but the impeachment crisis came about because i'm a few remember your history, johnson tried to remove secretary of

war stanton and stanton refused to vacate the office and congress passed a law that said that the president did have the right to finish a tenure early. they decided to have a showdown. they pushed it by trying to get rid of stanton. he was the toughest of the cabinet in how to deal with the south. johnson didn't want to see the south plundered. stanton wanted to plunder the south. this led to a showdown that lasted several months. in which utilize a mccardle johnson, on a daily basis, met with her husband, talked about who he could rely on and who you couldn't, help figure out who his allies were and his enemies. they were in that thing together all the way through.

in her own way, she was like a hillary clinton. i think hillary was brilliant in handling this most recent impeachment crisis. the right wing conspiracy was perfect. politically, it was brilliantly done. i say that without regard to artists and affiliation. i work for a republican president. but i am not up here to talk about who is right and who is wrong on the politics of it, in terms of democrats and republicans. i'm just talking about managing an impeachment crisis and admiring very good handiwork. , when it comesk to crisis management, probably my all-time favorite is gloria harding. the harding president was one of those presidencies that look to grade at the time.

he was a popular president. he had tremendous public support. and he managed, for a good time, to fool people. what people couldn't see was how corrupt that the administration was from the inside out. it's modern-day equivalent would be like allowing enron to drill a strategic oil reserve. that is exactly what was happening with teapot film. the members of harding's cabinet were taking oil reserves and secretly selling them off to oil companies. harding, who came from an interesting journalistic background, she was a tough newspaper woman. she was probably part of the entire corrupt affair that was the harding white house. they had a circle of cronies that was called the ohio gang.

they were figuring out literally how to loot the country. the veterans bureau secretary probably stole about $200 million in money that was supposed to go toward world war i veterans. the ohio gang openly sold all sorts of government licenses and commissions and they literally set up shop on k street. they went in the door at. you paid them some money and you got whatever you wanted. the corruption was unparalleled and we haven't seen anything remotely close to it. even aber mocks 80 -- even aber abramoff's fees are nothing by comparison. i have known him for a long time. i was astonished to find out some of the things that he had been a two. .- he had been up to historically, the harding administration went far beyond that.

and florence harding managed to the sets of political crises much would've then warren harding did. i had a lot of problems. they had to figure out how to handle some of this when it first began. they had to tell some of the ringleaders, when they were going to be caught, that they had 24 hours to clear out of the country. in more than one case, it worked. coffee went and evade being aggressive -- being arrested. it worked until one whistleblower committed suicide or was killed, but most likely .ommitted suicide in florence harding decided that it more be best to put distance between themselves in washington. they went on a whistle stop tour of washington and california.

this is when harding fell ill and died. that brought everything out into the open. she spent the that are part of months burning records. she went to white house records, personal bank records command took all the evidence that she felt could be misinterpreted -- and i think that was [laughter] and it was burned, gone just like that. so those are a couple of vignettes that i want to throw out there about first ladies and scandals to whet your appetite for the question-and-answer section. but also to show that first ladies are not simply in the white house to pursue charitable causes or philanthropic activities. most of themdo and take a philanthropic activity for political reason, but they really are are political creatures just like their

husbands. very few marriages withstand politics at that level unless both artie's to the marriage want to be -- both parties to the marriage want to be in the game. there is too much pressure. it's too intense and it is too hard to do. by the time you make it to the white house, for the most part, they are both fully committed to the game in the business of all it takes. -- up politics. i think it's time we started taking first lady seriously and looking harder at what they do, what role they play. i would even like to see first ladies debate when we have presidential campaigns. [laughter] for years, we found out what the first lady's recipe for baking cookies is. let's find out what their recipe is for handling some of the real issues. with that, i welcome any questions. >> on i've noticed in as far as

what i have interpreted myself, do you think that a person like nancy reagan, following that determinedp, was so to protect her husband, to keep them safe, to keep them out of harms way and then i take a person like hillary clinton who i think was in tune to capitalize on the advantages of where her husband was and manipulate it to where she could capitalize and progress on her own agenda. >> that is what she is doing. >> there are two different forms of doing it. i think george bush talks to his wife. there is not a husband in the world who doesn't sit down and talk to his wife.

what do you think of hillary clinton versus a nancy reagan type of approach? >> it is a good illustration when you look at the differences between the two, partly the generational phenomenon, i think. but the nancy reagan-ronald reagan partnership was more like the james polk and sarah polk partnership. they had a tree nuptial agreement. to her, sheosed said yes provided he did not interfere with his running for the senate. she correctly figured out that come as speaker of the house, he was the most important politician in the land, h more so than andrew jackson because the speakers who has to translate the agenda into real

legislation. his nickname was young hickory and andrew jackson was old hickory. they worked as a team. sarah polk helped write his speeches. -- helked all it took talked politics with the other members of congress to see how they were leaning. she would sound them out. she would help get legislation through. nancy reagan is more in that kind of mold. the career inhout sacramento and washington both attuned to ronald reagan's agenda and how to get that agenda in act it. .- that agenda enacted she was an intellectual. she had strong views with regard to the soviet union come out with how to pursue arms- control initiatives, views on issues like south africa. and she made them known. namely inside the closed circle. she didn't take her differences

of opinion public. but inside the white house itself, she was not at all reticent about getting involved in political matters that mattered most to her. she didn't have any separate ambition. i think the difference with hillary clinton and bill clinton is that these were two people who came together in a different era, both of them very competent, one of them perhaps more politically astute than the other. i think that she was maybe the one who was more politically astute. and she was determined to do carry on in her own right afterwards and has made a fascinating transition that no other first lady has even attempted. perhaps the closest to it would be a lenore roosevelt in the sense that she did carry on with an independent political career after fdr's death, going into the un as a delegate and becoming an activist on the world scene. but i think it is partly a

generational thing. i would imagine that we will see more of the hillary model of first ladies in the future. women will have their own career and their own independent thectives and will use position of first lady to advance. laura bush looks to be the opposite of what i said should happen because she is a in a much more traditional role right now. but there is a pendulum effect. every time we have a really activist first lady who is controversial, we tend to be followed with a first lady who has a much more traditional role. after eleanor roosevelt, bess truman did her best to avoid controversy to and so did eisenhower. after florence harding, grace coolidge did her best to stay out of the limelight. think we are evolving toward a more openly political first lady role, it will be a slow devolution.

and every so often, it will shift back. >> is it true that mrs. wilson virtually ran the country during her husband's disability? >> yes, the second mrs. wilson did. .dith galt wilson it is a time they called the regency, her reason see. it lasted from seven number 1919 until january 1920. he was convalescent, stricken probably with a stroke. there was some controversy over what -- over what caused it. initially, the fact that he had been stricken had been kept secret, even from the vice president. his doctor knew. she knew. people in the cabinet figured out something was wrong because they would come by and demand to see the president to get some important issue addressed and no one would be allowed in to see him. she would listen to them and she would go into the room and she would come out of the room and she would relay what she said he told her. [laughter]

in some cases, some of the cabinet members figured out it couldn't be so because they didn't think wilson would decide this on whatever the particular issue was. historians are a little bit uncertain over whether she was translating his wishes or whether she was in fact doing what she thought was best. there is some evidence that he should have listened to her more carefully if indeed she was because hiscountry most important priority was getting the league of nations treaty ratified. and he came down to a very close vote. and the senate majority, the democratic leader in the senate came to meet with them to advise him that he needed to compromise with the republican isolationists if they were going o the get the treaty ratified. she wanted to compromise and he refused to. so her political judgment was probably the better in a case.

he might've had the crowning a compliment that he sought. to actually claimed not have voted in the most recent election and was apolitical as far as anyone can tell. but after she met him, she became very involved in politics. in theld attend debates house of representatives. she read everything she could. she boned up on it and learned and became vital to him. she even bothered to learn communications codes so that she could translate the wartime cables that came into the white house. they all came encoded. she would translate the cables for him and take his instructions and put them in code and send them back out to the military. this very unusual woman, who claimed not to be involved in politics at all, once she was there at the seat of our, grabbed hold of it and went with it.

yes. >> thank you for your presentation. what about mrs. carter? my memory of her was of ruling the roost. i wonder if that is true. >> i think she got an unfair firstin the sense that ladies who really do become involved in politics openly draw a lot of criticism during and she would attend some cabinet meetings and that was highly controversial in the 1970s. i remember very well that her mere attendance suggested to some people that she viewed herself as an equal to members of the cabinet. and by the way, i should say word about that. there's no place in the world that is more hierarchical than the white house. it is an absolute rigid hierarchy. you go into the cabinet word -- cabinet room, he each person

has his or her own chair. they are free to take the chairs within when they leave the government, but they have to pay for the chair. i don't know what the current cost is. it used to be $1200. the polar very careful about those chairs. and staff never sit at the cabinet table. if you look at the pictures when you see the resident unique cabinet meeting, you will notice, in the cabinet room, that there are rows of chairs that line the room itself during you will see people sitting -- itself during you will see people sitting in those chairs -- line the room itself. you will see people sitting in those chairs. they are staffed. when you realize that there is a hierarchical sense that drives a white house and you see a wide sitting at the table, you can see -- and you see a wife

sitting at the table, you can see how some people got their hackles up. bar dreaded tod cabinet meetings to if she didn't know what was going on and wanted to know, she would sit down and learn. it is not an unusual thing. but mrs. carter was seen doing it publicly. it was something that would -- that became publicly known. in terms of how she handled the job of being first lady, she was probably one of the most professional. it has been common since the 1930s for first ladies to have a professional staff usually consisting of a press secretary, scheduler, maybe a social secretary, speechwriters, but rosslyn carter took it to a new level of professionalism. she actually designed a hollis e plan for her east wing office -- four -- she actually designed for her east wing

office. she was very active in some tough areas. she was tough and having to deal with mental health, mental disability. .ducation and she took it seriously. that also drew a lot of scrutiny at that time when i think people were not quite ready for another activist first lady. and she got a lot of criticism for that. but i think she did a great job in terms of being a partner in that presidency. when you have a one term presidency that sales at the end, it's kind of hard to say that the presidency itself was a success and therefore hard to say that the first lady was a success. but as a political pro, she was good. >> [indiscernible] weree camp david accords

a brilliant achievement, absolutely brilliant. i think we probably all wish today that we had been able to see those accords built on before we got to the point where we are today. the carter presidency is underrated in some respects come a certainly on the romantic front. he is the only resident who has been able to achieve anything like that, getting egypt to recognize israel, getting israel to agree to begin to pull back from #i. it was fantastic -- from mount sinai. .t was fantastic hearin question talked about the difficulty that nancy reagan had with buying china and all of this. hadthat jacqueline kennedy a rapport with the press. i wonder, in today's world, -- in today's world, with the media, nothing is not cap from the wreck in public for more , whether it isn't

critical to build your relationship with the media and whether that could entirely change or success or failure as a first lady. you are taking thoughts right out of my head. that is part of what i did in politics for many years. i worked with the press and i worked on image and advertising. i am a big believer that, if you are in politics, you need to build bridges to the press and understand how the press works. it is especially true for first ladies. there is a long history of first ladies being active with the press. we tend to think that it is only fairly. -- only recently that they have been scrutinized. but julie grant would sit down with newspaper or reporters along with ulysses s. grant. she would participate and not just talking about what they were going to do at the state dinner and how they would pay for the 25-course dinners. you do learn some fascinating

things about first ladies and entertaining. the grant residency takes the cake. their dinners literally were 25- course dinners. you might have as many as 10 different varieties of wine with one of these dinners. they cost thousands upon thousands of dollars, far exceeding the president's annual salary. and there was no entertainment budget at the budget -- at the house -- and there was no entertainment budget at the white house at the time. julia grant was caught up taking $2500 in cash in an envelope, which has never been explained where that came from. [laughter] who were goodes with the press to have something in common and is that some of them worked in the press. jackie kennedy was a reporter for a while. actually ran ag wa newspaper.

florence took over the newspaper for a while. she decided she liked it so much that she stayed with it. after she left the white house, she went to running that newspaper. she really understood the press. when she went into the white house, she joked with the members of the press, talked with the boys come as she called them, off the record so that she could be quoted when she want to but not when she didn't want to. she knew how the working press operated her and she they needed photographs. she was great at providing them with photo ops and getting herself in the papers. trickis a -- that is a that edith roosevelt also used. she knew the press were dying to get pictures of her kids, the family. so she would hire photographers to take the pictures and release them so that the rest was fed. they had the requirements met. and meeting the requirements of the press is one of the key things for a first lady if you want to be able to get along

with them. you first have to understand them and then you have to give them what they need to get the job done. i used to do some of this in presidential trip planning. the reagan white house is probably appropriately famous for the fact that we knew how to handle the press very well. mike deaver was an absolute genius in this. -- i worked with him on a number presidential trips where we had to figure out how to get our message across. when you know what the press needs and your respect those needs, you generally will get good rest. you're going to get better press than a few stiff the press can celebrities have finally figured this out. they are now staging pictures for the paparazzi so they don't have to put up with pictures they don't want being in print. >> do you honestly feel that the press coverage today is more

adversarial than it was 15-20 years ago? all the24-hour media time, so they have to create news. at times, i think they create, you know, news that is more confusing than it really is an official. >> i actually think that the relationship between the presidency and the press has gotten a little bit less adversarial. probably the height of it was right after watergate in the 1970s. when i began working with the press in 1980, on the presidential level, the campaign level, there was almost an attitude among reporters that come if you are in politics, you had to be covering up something -- among reporters ,hat, if you are in politics

you had to be covering up something. i have detected in the last couple of years this politicization -- these polemic where there is the presstold on one side and po on the other. and then there was the perception that cnn was a similar type news outlet for the clinton administration, very pro-administration. those characterizations are not entirely fair, but it is a rough characterization that is true. i think the press is a little bit adversarial -- a little bit less adversarial today as a result. salaries in the press corps have gone up tremendously. back in the 1970s, reporters made a living wage. today, the celebrities of the media make millions of dollars a year.

it is not a you -- it is not unusual for reporters to be earning a decent six figures. the salaries in dc are on par with top members of government. so as they become more and more part of america's elite, i think it shows in their coverage. occasionally at some of the lack of interest that the press seems to show on details of stories that are really very big. i still do some work now producing for television. i guess i am critiquing my own profession a bit. whatever part of the blame is mine, i accept it. yes. she seemed so devoted, but a deer in the headlines here >> you know, i liked pat nixon a lot. she had a really tough life and came from an external area background, a very humble

background. she was born in ely, nevada. been to that part. i lived in nevada for a while. ely, nevada is an old mining town. it is cold in the winter and it is sweltering hot in the summer. she was born there basically in a miners shack. it had a canvas roof. her mother died early. she basically had to raise her siblings herself durin. she was extraordinarily lucky to get into college and find a way to pay for it. from that very humble background, she ended up being next to, you know, the commander-in-chief and the president of the united states and maybe a little bit of the deer in the headlights comes from that.

she certainly didn't grow up in those kinds of our full circles. , i have of the politics was veryat she, again, active in her husband's campaigns when he ran for senate. she helped write his speeches. she went door-to-door with literature. she helped devise some of the tax strategies that were controversial in california. people said it was a really dirty campaign and she was there slinging the mud. toward the end, when the watergate crisis slowly unfolded, i think she probably fell into a bit of depression hearin. closely with john mclachlan, the speechwriter in the nixon white house. he felt that she had fallen into depression at that point. so strong woman, extra neri background, and i admire her in many -- extraordinary

background, and i admire her in many respects. >> in 1999, file that a conference of the presidential library to experience how the relationship between lbj and his wife lady bird [indiscernible] the archivists allowed us to listen in to some of the conversations that had been taped from telephone conversations between lbj and his wife while he was meeting with cabinet members. she was scolding him. as ais your take on her first lady? are all interesting come i guess. i am fascinated by them. but in her case, it is true. she was extremely bright. she grew up in a family that had quite a bit of money. she had a great education.

she met lbj when he was in texas. he basically told her during a weekend courtship that she was going to be his wife. he was an extremely determined suitor. in fact, so was richard nixon. when he met pat nixon, he pulled the same thing. it was practically be for state and he said we are going to get married one of these days. strange things happen between people who are driven to become presidents and their spouses. she threw herself into his work. she was one of the first wives to take a job in the senate on the senate payroll. she ran his office. a lotter ended up buying of media stations, radio and television in texas. again, one of the first leaders who understood how the press

works. that helped him quite a lot. they were a partnership from the beginning, i would say. was in some ways more of a stubborn president. i don't think he always listened to her. but i do know, in terms of working out the politics of the day, they did a lot of talking and he at least heard her. >> jacqueline kennedy by contrast, i think of her [indiscernible] is that the correct impression of her was she also enwrapped in politics? >> she is an absolute cultural icon. no question about that. she campaigned. she would go out on the campaign trail. but she was pregnant. the only reason she curtailed

her campaigning in the 1960 election was because her pregnancy was getting advanced and her doctors told her she needed to take it a little more easy. was at sense, she political wife. she got out and she didn't do as much as lady bird johnson. 80 bird johnson was one of the real active campaigners. in fact, the democratic convention was built to must dates in such a way that would feature her in that convention. later, when lbj had a fallout in the southern states because of the civil rights act, she did a whistle stop train stuart -- train tour and it worked. it was very successful. in that sense, no, jacqueline kennedy was not as political a spouse. she helped him with some policy related things. she spoke french fluently. , 1961, indochina

was becoming a problem here in the best hooks on vietnam were in french -- becoming a problem. the best books on vietnam were in french. she would translate them into english so the president could read them. i believe she, did this before he was actually in the white house. so she was not as much involved in the day-to-day politics and that became a problem as first lady. she didn't understand why people would put on her schedule that she had to have her lunch with the congressional wives and that is a pretty congressional thing for the first lady to do. lunch atinvited to a the white house and the first lady hosts it. dokie kennedy did not want

that. she wanted to do something more active. she became notorious at bailing on these events and calling on lady bird johnson to stand in her place. so lady bird would have to run to the west wing and fill-in whenever jackie decided to do something else. we will never know, but i think she would have been a little bit of a rebellious spirit if the kennedy administration had gone on longer. and it might have caused some fallout, some flak. snowball of those bde goes in washington so many times before -- you can only inb all of those egos washington so may times before it comes back at you. >> do you know if there has ever been a second lady or a with ansident

influential role? was there every week first lady? >> that is a good question. there have been some weak first latest -- first ladies who did not do much of their duties. vice don't know of many presidential wives who stepped kennedy than in the administration. that is a good question. you have given me something to look at i. why do you think that american politics are threatened by such an intelligent woman? [laughter] thatu know, i was asked question on a tv show just today.

we were -- the topic was whether or not we would have a woman president in 2008. if you look at other industrial countries and even other undeveloped countries, you see that women have been heads of state. the percentage of women in the legislature has an much higher in other countries than here. i think the reason for that is that we are such -- in a way, we are not a highly politicized country. we are a society. because of that, we haven't had a lot of women in politics until very recently. and it is a new phenomenon. i think new phenomenon's scare people. we have a lot of intelligent women out there now, both in state legislatures and congress and in the corporate world, in the military. it will be really interesting in five or 10 years. i think we will see women

running for office who have military experience that is more extensive than some of the men they will be running against. i don't know if that answers your question fully. >> will you comment on the [indiscernible] >> of course. it is a funny thing. when i was writing the book, i had to make a decision -- which first ladies should i include and which not? some include only the spouses of residents and they are considered to be first ladies. no one else's. interestingd of because rachel jackson died before he got to the white house. book on firstp a ladies and here is her biography and she never served a day in her life and then you have somebody like it if lane and and jefferson's wife had died the time -- died by the time he became president.

he had other women, daughters and friends, take over the duties of first lady. in terms of the historical contribution, i think harriet ine deserved to share credit the diplomacy of the buchanan presidency. how many people here have gone through the experience of arranging a wedding where you have a split in the family or who had divorces or people are unhappy with each other and you have to figure out how to make sure that uncle joe doesn't sit next to and whoever -- next to aunt whoever or there will be a fight. that everyproblem white house event because of the tensions in the country. if you put two politicians next to each other who had come from diametrically opposite sides of the argument that they up in the congress, they might be each other with canes. and if they were going to it in that congress, they might do it

in the white house. you had the problem with the seating charts of keeping rivals separated from one another so that you could have a white house event that didn't deteriorate into bloodshed. in a way, i think she deserves a lot of credit for that time for which the country did not descend into war but tried to contain the forces that were pulling it apart while seeking some other solution. it is not a trivial a congressman. in terms of legislation, there is 90 of evidence that harriet lane sounded out legislators -- there is plenty of evidence that harriet lane sounded out legislators. that is a useful role. in politics, you often don't want to ask someone to be on your side unless you are sure that they will be on your side or unless you know that the press will be. passing his tax cuts in

1981, reagan had to do a deal on sugar subsidies with one senator. we knew in advance that sugar subsidies would be the price to get the tax cuts through and that was the only way it would happen. that is how politics works. it is all horsetrading. if you can have somebody find out what kind of horse do want, how big, what color? that is too big of a horse for what you're going to give me. summit he has to do that work for the resident during the president is the closer. -- for the president. the president is the closer. harriet lane did that. so first ladies who get actively involved in the politics and find out who the supporters are, where the problems are, who can be brought over, who is on the fence, what it takes to bring them over, that is the kind of

political partnership that she was. >> how do you envision [indiscernible] [laughter] >> if that happens, it will be an absolutely fascinating turn of events. first off, he is a two-term former president. how can you ignore that? and one shouldn't. if she were president and he were first man from a first gentleman -- i don't know what we will call him -- [laughter] the country didn't know what to call first ladies for a long time. when refers competence a book on first ladies came out in

1981, it was just just called "the ladies of the white house ." for a file, they were called sometimes democratic queens. [laughter] and that often would be leveled with an insult. in the early days of the country, if you said you are acting like a queen, you're saying that you are acting like those people we discovered it in the revolution. so for getting whatever he might be called, here you have a former president who is deeply knowledgeable about policy matters and political personalities. he has dealt with all of these people. i can't imagine that he wouldn't have an influence on policy. i can't imagine that she wouldn't consult him or you simply equate. he would be an asset. could sort of think of a political dream couple, it would be one in which i have a shadow president that i can use to

double the level of activity that i can get done in a day. one of the worst problems you have in politics at that level in the white house or time limits. there is only so much anybody can do in the 10-12 hour day. but you have him there and her and you can double up. and people will deal with him because he has stature in his own right as well. madame president has the power. you have the potential to be twice as effective. whos dealing with a man wanted to become prime minister of have to stand. his one big complaint was a schedule, that he just could not get control of it because the pakistani society was such that everybody wants to deal with the top man and the top man only. so this poor guy was overwhelmed. he was absolutely overwhelmed during he was drowning. have a of bill clinton and hillary clinton, you would never have that problem.

so with the country tolerate it? i don't know. i can imagine that there will be some criticism. but on the other hand, it is tough to say that someone who won the presidency twice isn't entitled to have a pretty strong voice in that house. >> [indiscernible] [laughter] >> that would be the hard part. he wouldn't want to go back. i think i probably used up all of our time. [applause] thank you very much. >> the second season of first ladies, "influence and image," will begin on monday at 9 p.m. all episodes of the first season are available online at www. c- span.org/first ladies. >> on our facebook page, we

heard from you which of the first ladies programs was your favorite. lincoln and adams are getting the most votes. >> coming up tonight, the new energy secretary on efforts to reduce the nation's dependency on oil. then president obama speaks to students in belfast, ireland. that is followed i've president obama and g-8 leaders on a new trade agreement. on the next "washington journal," connors when mac thornberry of texas on the g8 summit and the surveillance programs and the conflicts of syria, turkey, and north korea. rosa delauro of connecticut

talks about the fundamental -- the farm bill. later, an examination of the supreme court decision. "washington journal co.'s quote is live morning at seven eastern on c-span. essential to remove france from canada for the united states to have the opportunity to achieve its independence. and the few people led by understood the possibilities for america to become a great country. in different fro words. two and a half million free people, for them to in effect get the british to eve the

french from their borders and then the french to help them to get the british -- vict theish to edict french from their borders and then have the french evict the british was extraordinary. secretary moniez. this is 90 minutes. >> good morning, everybody. ok, that works. , to the 2013ybody gia energy conference. we intend to delve deeply into critical energy issues that face

us today. one housekeeping note before we get started. you will have the opportunity to ask questions of our keynote speakers. at your table, there are several notecards. write down your questions, hold up the card and a staff member will collect them. the mic is not working? too bad. not loud enough. ok. sounds really loud appeared to me -- loud up here to me. we will follow the same practice at our panel discussions later today and tomorrow with the notecards. this morning, i have the pleasure of introducing the secretary of energy as the

opening keynote speaker of the 2013 eia conference. when nominating dr. monies, president obama said he was proud to nominate a brilliant scientist who already knows his way around the department of energy. an expert in a range of energy subjects. he has a proven record of collaborating with the best thinkers and innovators to advance new energy solutions. immediately before his appointment, he was professor of physics and engineering systems at the massachusetts institute of technology. he was the founding director of the mit energy initiative. before that, he was undersecretary of the department of energy and was responsible for overseeing the department of science and energy programs. his impressive resume includes serving as associate rector of science in the office of science and technology policy at the white house. two years ago, he concluded our

discussion at the 2011 eia conference as the final keynotes baker. -- keynote speaker. ourpresentation stimulated interest in potential technological advancements in the future of energy and ovation. -- energy innovation. today, we are proud to have him leading the department in these new technologies. we are happy here to begin our moniz.ference, dr. [applause] , for theyou, adam introduction. to myt, adam referred last go round in the department. i would note that come in that time, adam was in the private sector.

we benefited from his advice and observations on how energy markets were developing and how to draw upon that advice on a more regular fashion. he also mentioned that, two years ago, with his red assessor, richard newell, he had a chance to address this conference. he may not know that the started out to be a panel. when people thought i was on it, they'll withdrew. ae panel became by de facto keynote address. he is laughing because he knows it's true. anyway, it is a pleasure to be here. speaking of the second tour of duty, i have said this a number of times. many have questioned the judgment of one returning to the department. theory ofoke the samuel jackson.

i come back with a lot of hope that we will in fact be able to move the ball forward on a number of important issues in the department of energy as well as other issues like security that fall under the department's responsibilities. a team i want to emphasize is that we have a funny kind of asymmetry in how we look at the past and the future. we kind of look back and we see enormous changes that have happened in many spheres of our activity over a short time. although we rapidly forget what it is like to live in that world without some of the new technologies.0 then looking forward, we tend to project the same. -- i think the theme is will start it with some reminders on how things have changed, including in the energy sector, and expect in ways that we do not know how we will see

far more change than we tend to technology lot of it driven and with policies as well. if i go back to when i left government service, generate 20th, 2011 -- 2001, there are various little factoids. today, it is not about the evening news. there is still the evening news, but it is more of a bottom-up approach with a much greater order of news, channels to reach us. happens to be "the daily beast," given its role in my confirmation. with got mixed reviews something called an ipod. today, i have to walk around with two iphones all the time, 24/seven.

mark zuckerberg was a high school student. even i have a facebook now, an old guy. though the if we go back to 10 years ago, oil production continue to fall, imports increasing dramatically. top business leaders and an enormousjected natural gas shortfall. ethanol barely registered on the fuels market. we are talking about incredibly reduced costs. wind power up by 15. there really has been a

even sincechange the four years since president obama took office, we have seen this. we know unconventional gas and oil has been a game changer in this country. we often think of the energy industry as one of incredible inertia and very hard and resistant to change and there are some truth in that. there are some good reasons. on the other hand, we have seen a complete change, not only of of ground troop -- truth situation with oil and gas, but a really -- a shift in attitude away from one in which we are thought of as major, having

.ajor energy dependence this has happened at the same time that renewables have doubled in the last four years and are expected to double again by 2020 and one in which the natural gas, the market- driven natural gas substitution for coal has been a trip -- a major contributor. these all have major implications for our economy, environment, national security. my remainder of my rocks -- remarks, i want to make a few points in four areas i would connect energy and security. one is the continuing fact that

list conventional resources in the world are located away from command centers. another, and that can be expanded to things like critical elements for a whole bunch of energy technologies. secondly, the connection of climate change and security. to comment on nuclear energy and its relationship to certain national security concerns. the issue of vulnerable infrastructures and what that means in terms of our security. i will make a few comments. oil and gass to we all know this has been a major change, four years

of increasing production. .t may not be a major milestone crude oil imports and exports becoming equal, first time in a long time. however, this does not change the fact that we need to reduce our oil dependence as a transportation fuel. lots of reasons for that. one is the global price of oil continues to impact gasoline prices. even though we are producing so much more oil, but in the geopolitical side, we should recognize the energy problems of many of our closest allies is in national security issue for us in the sense that their problems can limit our degrees of freedom in terms of foreign- policy policy options.

we still need to adjust, we cannot take our eye off the ball. we need to address this question of oil dependence and reduce the nearest -- strategic value as a transportation fuel. president obama noted there is no quick fix for this am a but there are three directions -- for this, but there are three directions we need to pursue in domesticto supporting production and lower imports. one is efficiency. we will come back to that. the historic agreement increases inajor our standards that happens in this administration. secondly, we can talk about ,lternative fuels, biofuels

natural gas or natural gas derived fuels. we can talk about a new paradigm of electrification of the transportation sector. we forgetrit of -- how different things look today than just a few years ago. in 2009, the american on a mobile industry was on the brink of collapse. .ales have plunged 40% the industry had lost 400,000 made ad the president decision to provide support for gm and chrysler on the condition that they take steps necessary to fundamentally restructure the businesses. the department of energy played a role in supporting innovative new technologies. for ford to loan

upgrade factories, to introduce new technologies, to raise the fuel efficiency of popular vehicles. on the other side of the half a $1 billion loan went to tesla. the industry looks totally different from what we were saying for years ago. the big three all return to profitability. manufacturing almost doubled tesla repaid the entire allen's on its loans to the department of -- the entire balance on its loans to the department of energy. they are moving to export their

vehicles in 2014. think back for years, the picture is totally different, all the way from our traditional vehicles to laying the foundation for a surprising future relative to today's expectations on what the electric vehicle future will look like. it is a very important change and we need to keep that in mind as we think of the future as being a simple extrapolation of the present. with tesla, that that is a pretty high performance vehicle. consumer reports called the model s the best car we have .ver tested not the best electric vehicle, the best car they ever tested. the department --

looked at the fuel costs for electric vehicles. gasoline prices we see at the corner station, but we do not see the electric fuel costs. the national average is about $1.14 a gallon equivalent. bit of state-by-state variation, but much more stability in those prices. obviously, operating fuel cost does not hide the fact that there is a large capital cost difference currently. even there, if you take tesla we haveic information, lfing of the base cost.

things like getting battery some of the technology directions we are becauseng our critical there are lots of attractions in int model, -- traction's that model, but a ways to in terms of scaling because of .ower initial costs we could go on and talk about .ther fuel replacements things like biofuel costs will come down slowly than once anticipated. off theake our eye ball, they are coming down and are approaching interesting areas. natural gas as a vehicle fuel, we are clearly using that much less than other countries, but the steps forward look interesting. class eight vehicles, station to

may verynfrastructure, well have some legs. wethe natural gas side, still do not know the extent to which similar developments will occur in other parts of the world. if and when they do, that will have a profound effect on our security issues, even if we remain the largest producer in the world because it can change flows dramatically in our hemisphere, europe, and the far east. there is a major issue around exports.ng

as i said in my first few weeks at the department, i have had a pretty thorough review of the processes and we are getting to the point of getting to the s, which ivaluation plan to do as expeditiously as i can. turning to climate change, as many of you know, the last years, and military and former military leaders, the intelligence community, have all emphasized the implications of climate change for our , particularly its role as a potential threat multiplier in certain parts of the world, unstable parts of the world. ,n addition to military leaders religious leaders have also come

forward. i personally signed a letter with the scientists, priests, rabbis, ministers, some years back in which the theme was fundamentally while there may or may not be disagreement on how we got there, there is agreement on what we need to do going forward in terms of taking care of our planet. the underlying science is really not debatable in terms of the driver of the need to adjust climate change. there is clearly lots of room to debate how we do it, what we do, how fast we do it, but not the underlying science. the president has made it clear that we will have a strong push as best we can to address climate change, energy efficiency is one of the major

approaches. we need to move towards lower carbon and zero carbon fuels and we also need to emphasize rings like sequestration -- things like sequestration as an approach for the expected continued use of: this country -- the use of coal in this country and the world. i will not go through a lot of discussion about zero carbon fuels. i will mention silver. costs have dropped dramatically. -- i will mention solar. costs have dropped dramatically. i will argue that i believe the ofle and timeframe of impact solar technology, i believe it

is underestimated. there are many situations today when solar is competitive. there is more to do. we are aggressively pursuing this all the way from basic research to deployment. i think that is an example of something we will look back on at10 years and be surprised the scope of the change. nuclear energy has security implications in terms of some of our nonproliferation efforts. i thinkefer to tom, but what is going on in georgia and south carolina with new nuclear

plant construction is absolutely critical for the future of nuclear power in this country on cost and on schedule construction is one of the most important factors, probably the most in fact her -- important factor am a for the future of nuclear power. for plans of been announced for closure in the united states -- been announcede for closure in the united states. we remain a department interested in pursuing small modular reactors as a technology option for the future. -- we areknow helping to move some new technologies and expect to have the first land in operation by 2022. the could change a lot of

dynamics around how nuclear power is deployed. finally, i would mention the ine-ribbon commissions work terms of management of nuclear waste. as many of you know, the blue- ribbon commission recommended a different approach, one based deciding on, facilities.osal emphasizing strong dual tracks of storage and disposal with a pilot storage plant to come on in less than a decade. third, a new organization to nuclear waste and spent fuel in integrated fashion. havean organization

sufficient authorities and access to the funds to be successful. the administration has endorsed those principles. there is draft legislation being nowloped in congress right supporting those principles and i am hopeful we will be able to move forward in that way, which i believe is the most promising approach to starting to move .uel away from reactors the blue-ribbon commission, the administration, and the congress or emphasizing we would like to move fuel from shutdown reactors and all of these changes will require statutory action, so we await the actions of the congress. the fourth area, i think my time is about up, infrastructure. the whole issue of a dressing energy infrastructure is clearly a security issue as well

as an economic issue and an enabler for changes in the energy system. with gasng renewables and other sources. i will say a couple of things. it may not be well-known, the department of energy does have a specific responsibility as the lead agency in terms of emergency emergency response working with dhs and other organizations in terms of major disruptions. hurricane sandy, of course, was such a case. the department was heavily involved, but we all learned a lot in that episode. we all learned how we need to be .etter prepared to respond i think we also learned the incredible interdependencies of our infrastructures.

electricity, natural gas, information, fuels. a major problem was fuels. it was tremendously complicated by the failure of other infrastructures like electricity. there were institutional issues, place theput in appropriate waivers to allow private companies to participate collaboratively? the president is very much focused on this, including principles meeting quite recently. the collaboration is really and we are trying to work together to figure out the system of preparedness so that when we have further disasters, we can be much more efficient and effective in going after

them. taking verytime, hard -- thinking very hard about how we get more robustness and resilience into our infrastructure, satisfying economic, environmental, and security needs. ,he last comment i will make infrastructure is a good pivot because it will be a major part of what we are calling the energy review. many of you may know the recommendation made by the president's council of advisors in science and tech knowledge he in late 2010 to try to forge a new approach to how we put together an integrated energy policy. i will not go into the arguments about whether or not we have one or not. -- there is clearly more we can do in terms of

bringing to the table all the equities energy that so many points of our administration have and so many committees in congress have. we label energy, but the reality is, there are strong equities across the administration. the key concept is that we need to combine the convening power of the white house to bring the multiple agencies to the table at high levels. the policyutilize and analytical strength of the department of energy to underlie the process as an executive secretary while bringing about -- bringing all of the agencies together. a first installment was done two years ago. that, in fact, going back to our earlier discussion, called for an increased emphasis on the

trans-. -- transportation technologies that we discussed earlier. that was a baby step in the sense of in involved one department. now we need to go on to the policy world bring together all of these threads. the president endorses this approach. for the department of energy, it means building up our analytical capacity. those are the main point i wanted to make.

is we my high-level views is we look back should look back a little bit to inform ourselves how different it is likely to look in 10 more years. technology driving a lot of it, cost production of alternative technologies, but also synergistic policies of the type we like to develop. thank you. [applause] >> ok, thank you very much. . have 24 questions, 25 >> synthesize. >> the secretary only has time for a couple of questions. that will not be as hard as it sounds. there is one question on the

loan program. the remaining 20 questions are all about lng exports. [laughter] let me go to the first question. the managemente and transparency of the doe loan program to spin it out as its own entity? are there some examples of successful, federal sponsored energy r&d that you have seen? >> i can think of one. >> successful r&d and the loan program itself. >> there are many examples of -- i would point to a national academy study about 10 years ago that looked only at the

thaty efficiency sector found a large multiplier in ly sponsorederal r&d. to give a couple of specific examples, two different spheres, i would go back to the beginnings of the unconventional gas revolution. not only federal, but the interplay of federal, public- private, and well-timed finite to credits came together really help spur this natural gas revolution. i could go into more detail, but that has been well chronicled. in the report i mentioned earlier, that is going back to something that underpins our current fossil abundance,

natural gas abundance. in many ways, the department r&d supported the advance of solar. in technology, i could go back with industry to lay the foundation. i can skip forward and pivot to loans with a loan guarantee that is supported by -- supported the largest solar plant that passed a milestone in california desert. that takes us to loans. i have not thought in terms of spinning that out. is in the major programs

a stewardship mode at this time. do stilln programs have authorities, but they need to be thought through in terms of new policy directions that might use those authorities. in my own review and that of i think thekly, doe has built up a very professional organization that is getting very good marks in terms of its due diligence and it's structuring of the loan programs. in terms of metrics of failure, which people like to focus on, i would note that even projecting forward the current loan portfolio across all three programs, projecting forward, we 10% of theexceeding

congressionally mandated loan loss reserve. this looks like a pretty healthy portfolio. i believe there are a number of success stories and tesla is one of them. >> for the remaining 19 questions, when will doe act on ?he next lng export application >> expeditiously. >> thank you very much. [applause] >> i need to learn to do that. alright, i want to welcome you thank yougain and very much to the secretary. before i introduce our next speaker, i want to take a few minutes to discuss some events

at eia. i would like to provide a warm eiaome to four former administrators who have joined us today. could you guys all stand up, please? [applause] when i said i really wanted to give them a warm welcome, i want to scold them a little. none of them told me how hard this job was going to be. ok. andve been here a year now i want to report that even in the midst of sequestration and budget cuts, eia is not disappearing. we are actively bringing back thatof the work products we had to drop in 2011,

including the oil and gas reserves report and the international energy outlook. at eia lastved june, i announced several priorities. we have had some progress since then. i said we needed to transform our data operations. this statistical agency, goes to the core of what we do. we have 70 major surveys at the heart of our mission that curly -- currently rely on a myriad of legacy. 1-2-3.remember lotus ? if that computer ever dies, we are in trouble. we need to fix that. modernizing and simplifying these processes and systems is essential to the mission. i am happy to say we are very

near completion of a pilot project and the review that should allow us to decide how to move forward in updating our reports systems. it will make it easier on our respondents. we will be able to do a lot of things on the web and it will make it easier for our employees. a lot of stuff has to be entered by hand and checked by hand and we can do a lot of that electronically now. new stately created a noos of the art data center. it will reduce the rent we pay to the secretary of a million dollars over the next four years. it supports green i.t. initiatives. i said we needed to increase our analytical impact. we have done a number of things. a daily new york

city gasoline survey following hurricane sandy. for those of you with the federal government, you know it takes abouts -- it six months or more to get through that the office of management and budget. we got this done overnight. winterased northeastern natural gas electricity alerts when we had some very cold weather in new york and new england last january. we provided a lot of reports to congress, including on a number -- including a number of iran's role. .e have added brent crude we added global crude oil,

selling at very different prices now. to thed daily posting publication. this is a few of the things we have accomplished so far going forward. keeping up with changes in the data and modernizing our tools. balanced approach to ensure our forecasts are based on sound models while analytical capability so that eia can remain the leading edge provider of relevant analysis. one idea to dress these challenges would be to change some of our reports. needed to further modernize our website to improve the information gathering experience for our stakeholders.

we haveast year, launched a new state energy portal within our act of energy infrastructure mapping capabilities. witheated an interface electricity and state energy data. .e will be doing more of these we launched the new electricity data browser to increase accessibility. we introduced new radio services which provide broadcast stories on analysis to radio stations across the country. one of my favorite things we did last year and i hope we will do it again this year, we had a volunteer saturday session for boy scouts and girl scouts to earn energy merit badge. very unusual for federal agency to get involved in that, but i thought it was worthwhile.

education is one of our prime directives. as you know, i am happy to see all 850 of you still here. -- eiatablish the ei j energy conference. we are not done yet. collecting oil production data on the same basis, we are looking at how we might collect data on rail shipments of crude oil. , we hope to launch an oil .roductivity finally, we are planning to do more with synergies and expertise that exists within eia.

it appears at the top of our webpage, it is a great example of how close cooperation across all of our offices can produce excellent results. building on this depends on fully developing these connections within eia. i look forward to keeping you posted in the next year. i would like to introduce our next speaker. ,homas fanning, chairman president and ceo of the southern company. 4.4 million customers, more than 43,000 megawatts of generating capacity in atlanta, it is the leading energy company serving the southeast. southern company owns electric in four states. as well as fiber optics and wireless. tom became president in august of 2010 and later he assumed

additional responsibilities of ceo and chairman. he has worked for southern company for more than 30 years and has held 15 different positions. tom worked very closely with the former florida governor jeb bush to develop a state government energy policy in florida. he served on the governor's transition policy team and was appointed by governor bush to cochair a realignment and closure advisory committee. his education includes programs that the international institute for management and development in switzerland and at the harvard university school of business. ladies and gentlemen, please give a warm welcome to tom fanning. [applause] >> it is a delight being here. little bit,w adam a

he is a delightful guy and i know he will do a great job. you all do great work on a great service for america. it is an important role that you play and helps folks like us execute what we have to do to serve the families and the southeast. it was so fascinating. you will hear very consistent themes between what i have to say and what the secretary says. i was i knew each other, vice chair and he was on the board there as well. i do not know if we did the vulcan mind meld then or not, but you will hear similar themes. it will be illuminating. whenever i talk about energy things a lot of the

facing us today, i always want to start with context. when i think about what has gone on around the globe, i reminding -- reminded of this job from billy joel. the good old days were always good and the future ain't as bad as it seems. when you look around the globe, there is clearly an economic malaise and we have our challenges here in the united states. we have high unemployment. we have a slow-growing economy. despite those challenges, and the things that strikes me is some people are starting talk about a new normal. i think as citizens, as leaders of the enterprise, whether it is business or policy or politics, we owe it to the american citizenry to reject that new normal notion. i am here to tell you today that energy provides us an

opportunity to do just that. people are already working on it, right? vice chair of the atlanta federal reserve board and monetary policy is doing everything they can do from a fiscal policy standpoint, a lot more work needs to be done. i consider fiscal policy right now. i want you to consider something that i live with everyday. when i consider the families we serve in the southeast, 48% of these families take less than $40,000 a day. these days -- these families make tough kitchen table decisions every day. the question i put to you and to myself and anybody ideal with, why can't we? i think we owe it to america to

address these tough issues and and a way to play offense what is considered to be a challenge to environment. i am happy to say the energy the oil,roadly in natural gas, coal, electricity, we can and i think it is exciting. something you have not seen in your lifetime. energy policy today is based on scarcity. despite a doubling of exports since 1990, we still remain energy importer. still projects that even by 2030, we will import 21% of our energy. what i am here to tell you is, working on a number of projects, i believe we could be an net energy exporter by 2020.

i think we could become as a nation, one of the largest producers of energy in the world by 2030 or 2035. reversing that trend has such great advantages for america. it gives us an unassailable advantage to restart the manufacturing economy. .ake american lives better i think we can do that. some people have tried to quantify these benefits. citigroup has a series of analysts and they have estimated that if we did this done, we .ould add 2-3% to our gdp there goes your new normal. we can create somewhere between 3 million and 4 million new jobs by 2020. furthermore, i think we should consider the fact that by 2030,

2035 we can create economic value in the range of 3- 5,000,000,000,000 dollars. tonk about what we -- three $5 trillion. let's think about the notion that energy is growing every is growingectricity what any five times other energy sector is. what i want to do now is focus on electricity policy. i am out there a lot and you can google it and you to bits and all of that stuff. i will give you the readers digest version. what ever you want to call it, -- we need to take

advantage of the full portfolio. we need to promote energy innovation as a national priority. we need to restore america's financial integrity. let's go through those three things. the first one was the full portfolio. you probably own stocks. you probably have a favorite stock and i hope it is southern company. even if it is, you would not just invest in southern company. the portfolio that i want to speak specifically about would include natural gas, renewables, energy efficiency, energy per to timothy, nuclear -- energy productivity, nuclear. natural gas, and that is an industry that is in the midst of revolution based on technology innovation.

.hat should be a theme for us it has changed the game by unavailableherwise resources. the third company is the great big electric company from an energy production standpoint. we produce about as much electricity as the nation of australia. we have moved tremendously towards natural gas as our primary energy resource. onlyor six years ago, we produced 16% of our energy from natural gas. this year, 47%. we can take that as high as 55%. we are the third largest consumer of natural gas in the united states unavailable resources. the third. we used to be known as a coal

company. accrues to the families we serve. last year, we were able to give the families in the southeast $1 billion in fuel savings as a result of the shift. we have made our big bet. i am all in on natural gas, but i want to tell you it is not a panacea. you cannot put all of your eggs in that basket. , butk about this a lot there are five reasons why you want to be cautious about natural gas as a primary fuel source. we've got to resolve the environmental impact on fracking. we have to build out the infrastructure in america. that includes pipelines and we need to improve our storage capabilities. have got to make some

historic decisions about exporting natural gas. being parochial, you may be interested to know that i am in favor of exporting natural gas. is goinge nation through an enormous demand shift when you consider manufacturing, potential for penetrating transportation. united statese consumed about 67 per day. a lot of estimates that call for white 2020, summer between 100wo over 100 -- to over per day. what happened to price and volatility? the elongation of that point, and that is counterparty credit risk. . i know that sounds technical,

but companies like mine and the rest of industrial america make this big shift and we consume a lot more than we did, we will need to have healthy viable producers of natural gas so that we can hedge volume and price long-term. that will be a requirement to reduce follow kilo the for this important resource -- volatility for this important resource in america. and it will the bet continue for decades to come. it is an unassailable advantage for america. the second one is renewable. renewable prices are coming down and the growth has been tremendous and we have participated. just over the last 12 months, southern company has procured or 1200 megawatts of

renewables. we have procured 650 megawatts be consumed inll alabama and in georgia and we are buying it from oklahoma and kansas. that is kind of interesting. solar resources in new mexico and nevada and california but the largest voluntary solar program in the state of georgia. we have built and operate one of facilities inass texas. we are doing a lot. if it benefits our customers, we will continue to do more. there are three limitations that we have got to consider in thinking about its role in the energy complex going forward. number one is the fact that with

there areresources, few people. we need to build big transmission systems. .t is an intermittent resource when the wind does not blow and the sun does not shine, we have to have a backup fuel source. it is most likely to be natural gas. you are doubling down your bet on natural gas. this is an industry that gets a lot of federal tax subsidies. 100 times those afforded to the coal and gas industry. i do not think that policy is sustainable in the long run, but i can assure you and i think about renewables, or it is an important resource, it will remain important.

for the southeast, where we have 9.5 cent power-one average comic it would be limited in its and -- average, it would be limited in its penetration until the end of this decade. it is something we will consider in thinking about more innovative solutions. it could be the game changer. the third area is energy efficiency. i like to call back energy productivity. it has enormous potential. we are already doing a lot there. southern company has avoided four thousand megawatts of capacity since 1990, 11% of the ,- from an energy standpoint since 2010, we have avoided 1.6

billion kilowatt hours. that is like the annual consumption of energy of the city of birmingham and savanna taken together for a year. that is a lot. we are doing a lot. one of the things i want to talk about, when i think about energy efficiency and i consider what do we mean about consumption, i think this line makes a lot of sense. we want to use less energy when we can, but we want to use more where we should. ,eturn to the families we serve the 48% that make less than want0 -- $40,000 a year, i these families to live in a better place, to beat that are, to get better medical care. as the human existence improves,

they will use more energy. that is good for everyone. want to talkea i about is nuclear. nuclear currently represent about 20% of the nation's energy supply. we are leading the renaissance by building the first new nuclear unit in a generation of americans. in order to do that, you need to have attributes. , theeed to have scale project we are building in georgia by itself, $14 billion and takes 10 years to construct. .e own about 45.7% we undertake a project of that magnitude, we better have scale. the second attribute is you better have the highest level of financial integrity. if you start something that will

take 10 years to build, something like a nuclear plant, you cannot take a day off. and domesticlobal financial markets are variable. you have to have the staying build those important projects. finally, the third attribute is this is no business for beginners, you better have an excellent level of credibility. i think we've got that. nuclear is the nation less -- emissionless. the united states contains 27% of the world's coal reserves, but for a lot of reasons, cole has gone out of favor. --coal has gone out of favor. we are trying to find a way to keep coal viable.

we have been committed to finding solutions and thinking about the problems of the future. we have done a lot of work in the past on environmental control equipment, new generation technology, but one of the things we have done is a generation technology that uses coal that we are building in mississippi. as we create a synthesis, we will strip out 65% of the co2. we will take that co2 and we will use it. produce electricity with the remaining synthesis gas.

otherwisesource that goes unused, we produce more domestic oil him a more domestic electricity -- more domestic oil, more domestic electricity. the energy coming out of that $1.25. will be about it competes favorably with nuclear. this may be a way forward. we are proud to really champion that effort. when i think about this portfolio, natural gas, renewables, it energy efficiency, those are great and people talk about those a lot. but we cannot forget the workhorses of nuclear and coal with new technology innovation that really has served us so well for so long. when i think about that

portfolio, southern company is the only company in america that invests in every one of those segments. this is a way forward for america and we need to continue in this vein. energy innovation, look, we are already doing a lot. , theirst new nuclear unit 21st century coal project. we have deployed smart meters throughout the southeast and they are working great. i want to touch on a new innovation we are working on right now and that it's distributed generation. i talked about the limitations over new bulls for solar -- s, solar in this case. here is a solution where maybe you do not. maybe what we could do is put a , no film on your rooftop

transmission required at all. integrate that into our operation. there is a big issue, though, and it is this. right now, we sell power at 9.5 cents. muchnot think you will see penetration until the end of the decade. if it gets here, if production improves, if the translation efficiency continues to improve, maybe this makes sense and maybe it is a potential game changer. here is one of the big issues we have to consider, the early adopters of distributed generation are likely to be affluent customers. what we have to do is make sure we charge those customers fairly for their connection to the grid and their requirement

to have backup generation resources when the sun does not shine. failing to do that will create a subsidy less affluent people subsidizing early adopter affluent people. we have to get the rate structure right and if we do that, this could be an exciting innovation development. when you think about ibm and google and facebook and everything else, why can't we create that energy today? i am proud to be a leader in that, and i think we can do more to advance those causes. the third goes to restoring national integrity. why would i care about that? my company spends about 5.5

billion dollars a year. my industry spends about $90 billion a year. when you take oil and natural gas, these are some of the biggest capital intensive in the world. we need to access market that are going to be regular in nature. .e have to get it right otherwise we cannot advance these causes. there are three things that support restoring integrity. one deals with energy. provideolio is to clean, safe, reliable, and affordable energy. only congress in my opinion has the right lens to be able to balance those interests.

what we need to do is have congress step forward and way in and implement sensible policy. the second is to fix america's allen's sheet. 1 -- america's balance sheet. it is one of the biggest and most avoidable we face. whether you want to cost cut, i think we should. whether you want to raise taxes -- i do think we ought to reshape taxes. i am returning to the idea that energy is important. if we fail to deal with this, we will leave our children and

grandchildren with higher interest rates and slow economic growth. you are back to the new normal i reject. is a littlelution technical, but it relates to tax policy. i talk about that a lot he regarded -- about that a lot erie it we need to symbol phi tax code. it is incredibly complex. what we got. we made economic decisions on those. , but keep normalization going forward, i would do without all tax benefits in exchange for a fixed rate over time. allowher thing that would us to do is get government out of picking winners and losers.

we need to move in that direction. we need to wrap up. when i think about the exciting opportunities, facing the challenges through north american security land. energy security is national security that provides for economic security. the penalties are too great not to have national will. from a policy standpoint, all it isrows in the quiver, a priority to restore national integrity. that.t all do as a leader of one of the largest electrical utilities,

we are proud to play a leadership role. this will benefit the families the community across the united states. it is an honor to be here with you. inc. you very much. -- inc. you very much. much.nk you very 2 >> why don't you just stay right there. this reminds me of the secretary. there are a couple questions on the nuclear loan guarantee, and the rest of them are wide eu support alan j export -- why do you support exports? >> would you give us an update on the nuclear loan guarantee? me first give you a little bit of math.

it is interesting. when we first had it approved, the governor, the legislature, the public service commission provides 5000 jobs, 25,000 indirect, tremendous economic benefits. everybody is behind it. when we had that improved we thought we would have a 12 are sent price increase associate -- a 12% price increase. we think the net price increase is to be like six percent to eight percent. it is overt $2 billion in benefits of proof. --approved a right good approved. the benefits have outweighed cost. one of the benefits we have considered has been loan guarantees.

we were going to get closure on that, but i think the department of energy change their stance on requirements, and we have had to carefully weigh whether the new yvonne terms and conditions for the whether theees -- terms and conditions for the loan guarantees will ultimately benefit customers. behind the loan guarantee is the power company, which would have a market cap of about $20 billion. one of the strongest companies in america. we have to weigh the new terms and conditions with ultimate perceived economic benefits. last year they sold $4.2 billion of debt with an 18 year average life at 2.8%.

this is a great economic time it to build a nuclear plant. we have to wait to see whether the loan guarantees will give the benefit we thought it would. lately we have had progress. we are very hopeful, but we will see. this goes to the natural gas exports idea with half of the generating capacity in natural gas. why is it you are not as concerned about exports as some of the chemical companies? we have had a lot of conversations. pretty interesting. here is my if. is goodrspective. what

for america is generally good for my company. i am good for economic growth. north american energy security has a multiplier of fact to the economy -- multiplier effect to the economy that will serve the broader economy so well. if it helps the economy, i am for it. willnk natural gas prices find their way, whether we export or not. you may have temporary dislocations or temporary volatility, but if we give the producers an incentive to produce, they will produce, and we will have supply at a price that is going to provide equilibrium to the market in a sensible way. whether you ask board or not, i think prices will go to that level. , iwhether you export or not think prices will go to that level.

for the good of america, using the blessing to grow the economy is something we should do. >> the secretary talked about the need to move forward on climate erie get this question asked for your opinion on things like carbon taxes, fees, regulatory limits on co2 and that kind of thing. the company fit into that? >> i think carbon taxes are bad for the economy. when i talk about the solutions as a nation where you cut cost us or reduce taxes, but you should be for growth. growth capital. when i think about the 40% of families we serve, they have relatively inflexible views of

energy. and their consumption rises. taxing growth capital is not a in america.roach there is a better way to carbon technology than a carbon tax. look at nuclear. the look at the technology we are building. interesting stuff. 4 there are better ways to do it erie get we do not need to create a new tax. >> i think it is interesting. the project you have that would sequester co2 could be the first commercial ventures. >> we have had a long-standing relationship with the department of energy.

we run the research center in alabama. the only company doing widespread research that knows the project is not just storage. it actually has value. that is a precombustion basis. near mobile, alabama, we are researching capturing production. we are doing it in a variety of other ways. i think there is real advantage withnking together carbon enhanced oil recovery. that makes a lot of sense. it helps drive the economy.

>> we have had a lot of questions on the demand side management. it is a little different than efficiency. ?ould you go into that >> when i gave you the statistics of what we were capacity,have avoided roughly 11% of our capacity so 1.6 kilowatt hours since 2010. each of those are different ways to reference this kind of energy-efficient idea. it enables you not to build this month. generation planning. we use energy efficiency, and we use that as an actual resource in our expansion plans.

our plan is between 20 10 and 2020 two commit another billion to reduce energy consumption. >> are they cooperating on demand-side issues? >> sure. ,hat you get abou out of the soh the southeast in particular, are people who really understand the confluence of industry between business of the economy and regulation. quoted as saying we have regulation. the litmus test where any technology we develop is ultimate league, does it into her the benefit of our

customers from a clean, reliable, affordable standpoint. energythink about efficiency programs, they have got to compete against our normal energy reduction. , we do not have a renewable portfolio standard were fully oh standard. what this does is allow them to compete on a cost effect if pieces. what we need is the best marriage of reliable and affordable for our customers. it has worked white well. -- quite well. one in we were number the customer satisfaction index, so i think it is working pretty well. >> the next question is a bit of

a follow-up but from a different angle. stack upinnovation against regulated states and costed controls -- controls within regulatory? >> that is a great question. when i say we are the only company doing proprietary robust development, everybody else wants to cut cost. r&d is always on the chopping block. we are nearing 40 years of research and development with the company. we just put out a book called innovative solutions. it is a hot seller. [laughter] we have been able to demonstrate over the years,

what we do is give this back to , so we have been able to deploy by the end of this year $13 billion in environmental equipment on witht, on schedule quality, environmental removal capability better than anything else in the market. we have developed the largest fiberglass in the world as part of our technology. it is interesting stuff. when we think of our ability to deploy gas generation since the 1990 thought, it has allowed a norman possibility. -- a norman possibility. enormous possibility. we have done that with the idea we can deploy it again and have to where we can natural gas technology 10% to

20% cheaper than anywhere else in the united states. what we have been able to demonstrate with research in development -- and development are solutions for our customers. what is definite thing is how we are shifting research and development -- fascinating is how we are shifting research and development for the future. to look around the corners you have to have vision and courage. is why we are looking at .nnovative ways i think we can use those materials in our daily operation to the advantage of our customers. about new ways to deploy smart meters. when the tornadoes came roo through a couple years ago we could figure out who went out.

we can deploy our restoration efforts in a much more efficient way, and we got the lights back on with a faster timeframe. do you know when the power is off weather gasolines asians have power? is off?ine power >> we know. fort would be a good one hurricane sandy. the last question follows up on innovation and alternative energy. the biomass plant in texas, is that up and running? >> it is great. there is a problem. the energy cost does not compete well against wind energy. it rises with age are magically as you get into peak season. -- it rises as we get into peak

season. the plant runs great. everything is super. the largest technology using biomass in the world, and it is the largest in america. it looks like it is straight out of star wars. really a beautiful looking plant. only a utility guy would say that erie get >> i am surprised we did not get too many people following up on your prescription for how to make things better, but maybe we can talk about that after the break break. -- after the i have a quick announcement. please join me in thanking tom. >> thank you. i appreciate it. >> tonight on c-span, president obama speaks to students in belfast, ireland, followed by the new trade agreement.

later, author john roberts. on the next washington journal, the congressman of texas, a member of the armed services and.ttee on the g8 summit , turkey, and north korea. discussing federal food stamp programs. later, an examination of the supreme court decision. washington journal is live every morning on c-span. essay director keith alexander testifies before the house intelligence amity. the committee is examining the agency's surveillance programs. see it live starting at 10 a.m. eastern on c-span3.

we accepted gettysburg as a defeat. lee accepted gettysburg as a defeat. he also recognized the logistical outcome of the campaign had been very good from a confederate respect it. ,s for the longer-term impact he argues the heavy loss did not exceed what it would have been for a series of battles i would have and compelled to fight had i remained in virginia. >> the anniversary of the battle of geddes erg, sunday, -- battle of gettysburg, sunday, june dirty, on c-span3. wax the commissioner says unlocking a cell phone is not equivalent to piracy. he says why the library of congress decision to make crime is cell phone a

wrong. here is a look. the third time was not a charm. last october the library declined to extend the exception for cell phone unlocking, and as a consumer who unlocks his mobile device can face civil and criminal penalties under copyright law, even if the contract with his carrier has been fulfilled. his is a classic days -- case of the government loving a problem that does not exist. the free market was working just fine before the decision. report issued earlier this year found prices were down and investment has gone up. the manufacturers were developing innovative mobile

platforms, and consumers are wreaking the benefit. carriers do not need the federal government's help erie get a already have contract -- do not need the federal government's help. heavy-handed penalties including criminal fines could the a sledgehammer. my solution is ready simple. the relationship between wireless carriers and their customers should be governed by contract law and certainly not criminal law. debate overongoing the best way to accomplish this object if. -- objective. i have been thinking about this, and here is where i stand. i do not inc. we should take the can down the road.

we should fix this problem permanently. we do not need to have the same debate re-years from now. the case for criminalizing cell phone unlocking is not going to time.ronger over we do not need to give the fcc any additional rarity. i recognize it is not the norm to ask how grace not to add to its power. thiscc did not create mess, and we are not in a position to clean it up erie -- to clean it up. the problem is copyright laws, and congress should fix it. you should not interfere with contract. a consumer can choose from a wide variety of providers, plans, and phones. we should not restrict ability , andovide better, faster

cheaper options. we should help those who help consumers unlock their phones. unlocking can be as simple as dialing a code on your phone or something more complicated than that. i certainly could not unlock my phone right now, and i am sure others are in the same boat. helping consumers unlock their phones should not the a crime. >> president obama started off his trip in belfast, northern ireland when he spoke to a crowd of 2000 guest, mostly students. he was introduced by first lady michelle obama. this is 40 minutes. [applause] >> think you so much. -- take you so much. thank you so

much.\>> good morning. oh, what an honor. good morning, everyone. first of all, let me thank hannah for that very bold and wonderful introduction. and of course, i want to thank all of you for being here today. it is such a pleasure to be here in belfast. and as you might imagine, whenever we travel to places like this or anywhere else in the world, we've got a pretty packed schedule. we're meeting with presidents and prime ministers and first ladies. we're visiting historical sites and attending state dinners. and my husband is spending hours trying to make progress on global issues from trade to international security. but wherever we go, no matter what's on our plate, we always do our best to meet with young people just like all of you.

in fact, you all might just very well be some of the most important people that we talk to during our visits, because in just a couple of decades, you will be the ones in charge. yes, indeed. you'll be the ones shaping our shared future with your passion and energy and ideas. so when i look around this room, i don't just see a bunch of teenagers. i see the people who will be moving our world forward in the years ahead. and that's why we wanted to be here today. let me tell you, when i was your age, i never dreamed that i'd be standing here as first lady of the united states. and i know that my husband never thought he'd be president, either. neither of us grew up with much money. neither of my parents went to university. barack's father left his family

when barack was just two years old. he was raised by a single mom. and all along the way, there were plenty of people who doubted that kids like us had what it took to succeed -- people who told us not to hope for too much or set our sights too high. but barack and i refused to let other people define us. instead, we held tight to those values we were raised with -- things like honesty, hard work, a commitment to our education. we did our best to be open to others; to give everyone we met a fair shake, no matter who they were or where they came from. and we soon realized that the more we lived by those values, the more we'd see them from other people in return. we saw that when we reached out and listened to somebody else's perspective, that person was more likely to listen to us. if we treated a classmate with respect, they'd treat us well in

return. and that's sort of how we became who we are today. that's how we learned what leadership really means. it's about stepping outside of your comfort zone to explore new ideas. it's about rising above old divisions. it's about treating people the way you want to be treated in return. and as young people, you all are in a very powerful position to make some of those same choices yourselves. you have the freedom of an open mind. you have a fresh perspective that can help you find solutions to age-old problems. and with today's technology, you can connect with other young people from all over northern ireland and all around the world. so right now, you've got a choice to make.

you've got to decide how you're going to use those advantages and opportunities to build the lives you dream of. because that decision will determine not only the kinds of people you'll become, but also the kinds of communities you'll live in, the kind of world we'll all share together. and standing here with all of you today, i have never felt more optimistic, let me tell you. because time and again, i have seen young people like all of you choosing to work together, choosing to lift each other up, choosing to leave behind the conflicts and prejudices of the past and create a bright future for us all. that's what's so powerful about your generation. and again, that's why we're here today -- because we want you to know that we believe in each and every one of you. that is exactly why we're here. we believe that you all have the ability to make a mark on this world that will last for

generations to come. we are so proud of you. we expect great things. so with that, i think it would be a good opportunity for me to introduce someone who accompanied me here today. i let him travel with me every now and then. but he is someone who is just as excited and delighted to deliver a message of encouragement and support to all of you, my husband, the president of the united states, barack obama. >> thank you! thank you so much. thank you very much.

please be seated. well, hello, belfast! hello, northern ireland! you now know why it's so difficult to speak after michelle -- she's better than me. but on behalf of both of us, thank you so much for this extraordinarily warm welcome. and i want to thank hannah for introducing my wife. we had a chance to speak with hannah backstage and she's an extraordinary young woman, who i know is going to do even greater things in years to come. i want to thank two men, who i've hosted at the white house on many a st. patrick's day, for their warm welcome -- first minister peter robinson and deputy first minister martin mcguinness.

i spend the whole year trying to unite washington around things, and they come to visit on st. patrick's day and they do it in a single afternoon. i want to thank the secretary of state for northern ireland, teresa villiers. to all the ministers in the audience; to lord mayor m?irt?n ? muilleoir. and i want to thank all the citizens of belfast and northern ireland for your hospitality.

as our daughters pointed out as we were driving in, i cause a big fuss wherever i go. so traffic and barricades and police officers, and it's all a big production, a lot of people are involved -- and i'm very, very grateful for accommodating us. the first time michelle and i visited this island was about two years ago. we were honored to join tens of thousands on college green in dublin. we traveled to the little village of moneygall, where, as it turned out, my great-great- great grandfather was born. and i actually identified this individual in this place only a few years ago. when i was first running for office in chicago, i didn't know this, but i wish i had. when i was in chicago, as i was

campaigning, they'd look at my last name and they'd say, "oh, there's an o'bama from the homeland running on the south side, so he must be irish -- but i've never heard the gaelic name barack," but it pays to be irish in chicago. so while we were in moneygall, i had a chance to meet my eighth cousin, henry -- who's also known as henry viii. we knew he was my cousin because his ears flapped out just like mine. i leafed through the parish logs where the names of my ancestors are recorded. i even watched michelle learn how to pull a proper pint of black. >> whoo! >> who's cheering for that?

so it was a magical visit. but the only problem was it was far too short. a volcano in iceland forced us to leave before we could even spend the night. so we've been eager for a chance to return to the emerald isle ever since -- and this time, we brought our daughters, too. in particular, we wanted to come here, to northern ireland, a place of remarkable beauty and extraordinary history, part of an island with which tens of millions of americans share an eternal relationship. america's story, in part, began right outside the doors of this gleaming hall. three hundred and twenty-five years ago, a ship set sail from the river lagan for the chesapeake bay, filled with men and women who dreamed of building a new life in a new land.

they, followed by hundreds of thousands more, helped america write those early chapters. they helped us win our independence. they helped us draft our constitution. soon after, america returned to belfast, opening one of our very first consulates here in 1796, when george washington was still president. today, names familiar to many of you are etched on schools and courthouses and solemn memorials of war across the united states names like wilson and kelly, campbell and o'neill. so many of the qualities that we americans hold dear we imported from this land -- perseverance, faith, an unbending belief that we make our own destiny, and an unshakable dream that if we work hard and we live responsibly, something better lies just around the bend.

so our histories are bound by blood and belief, by culture and by commerce. and our futures are equally, inextricably linked. and that's why i've come to belfast today -- to talk about the future we can build together. your generation, a young generation, has come of age in a world with fewer walls. you've been educated in an era of instant information. you've been tempered by some very difficult times around the globe. and as i travel, what i've seen of young people like you -- around the world, they show me

these currents have conspired to make you a generation possessed by both a clear-eyed realism, but also an optimistic idealism, a generation keenly aware of the world as it is, but eager to forge the world as it should be. and when it comes to the future we share, that fills me with hope. young people fill me with hope. here, in northern ireland, this generation has known even more rapid change than many young people have seen around the world. and while you have unique challenges of your own, you also have unique reasons to be hopeful. for you are the first generation in this land to inherit more

than just the hardened attitudes and the bitter prejudices of the past. you're an inheritor of a just and hard-earned peace. you now live in a thoroughly modern northern ireland. of course, the recessions that spread through nearly every country in recent years have inflicted hardship here, too, and there are communities that still endure real pain. but, day to day, life is changing throughout the north. there was a time people couldn't have imagined northern ireland hosting a gathering of world leaders, as you are today. and i want to thank chief constable matt baggott for working to keep everyone safe this week. northern ireland is hosting the world police and fire games later this year -- which dame

mary peters is helping to organize. golf fans like me had to wait a long six decades for the irish open to return to the north last year. i am unhappy that i will not get a few rounds in while i'm here. i did meet rory mcilroy last year -- and rory offered to get my swing "sorted," -- which was a polite way of saying, "mr. president, you need help." none of that would have been imaginable a generation ago. and belfast is a different city. once-abandoned factories are rebuilt.

former industrial sites are reborn. visitors come from all over to see an exhibit at the mac, a play at the lyric, a concert here at waterfront hall. families crowd into pubs in the cathedral quarter to hear "trad." students lounge at cafes, asking each other, "what's the craic?" so to paraphrase seamus heaney, it's the manifestation of sheer, bloody genius. this island is now chic. and these daily moments of life in a bustling city and a changing country, it may seem

ordinary to many of you -- and that's what makes it so extraordinary. that's what your parents and grandparents dreamt for all of you -- to travel without the burden of checkpoints, or roadblocks, or seeing soldiers on patrol. to enjoy a sunny day free from the ever-present awareness that violence could blacken it at any moment. to befriend or fall in love with whomever you want. they hoped for a day when the world would think something different when they heard the word "belfast." because of their effort, because of their courage that day has come. because of their work, those dreams they had for you became the most incredible thing of all they became a reality. it's been 15 years now since the good friday agreement, since clenched fists gave way to

outstretched hands. the people of this island voted in overwhelming numbers to see beyond the scars of violence and mistrust, and to choose to wage peace. over the years, other breakthroughs and agreements have followed. that's extraordinary, because for years, few conflicts in the world seemed more intractable than the one here in northern ireland. and when peace was achieved here, it gave the entire world hope. the world rejoiced in your achievement -- especially in america. pubs from chicago to boston were scenes of revelry, folks celebrating the hard work of hume and trimble and adams and paisley, and so many others. in america, you helped us transcend our differences -- because if there's one thing on which democrats and republicans

in america wholeheartedly agree, it's that we strongly support a peaceful and prosperous northern ireland. but as all of you know all too well, for all the strides that you've made, there's still much work to do. there are still people who haven't reaped the rewards of peace. there are those who aren't convinced that the effort is worth it. there are still wounds that haven't healed, and communities where tensions and mistrust hangs in the air.

there are walls that still stand, there are still many miles to go. from the start, no one was naive enough to believe that peace would be anything but a long journey. yeats once wrote "peace comes dropping slow." but that doesn't mean our efforts to forge a real and lasting peace should come dropping slow. this work is as urgent now as it has ever been, because there's more to lose now than there has ever been. in today's hyper-connected world, what happens here has an impact on lives far from these green shores. if you continue your courageous path toward a permanent peace, and all the social and economic benefits that have come with it, that won't just be good for you, it will be good for this entire island. it will be good for the united kingdom. it will be good for europe.

it will be good for the world. we need you to get this right. and what's more, you set an example for those who seek a peace of their own. because beyond these shores, right now, in scattered corners of the world, there are people living in the grip of conflict ethnic conflict, religious conflict, tribal conflicts -- and they know something better is out there. and they're groping to find a way to discover how to move beyond the heavy hand of history, to put aside the violence. they're studying what you're doing. and they're wondering, perhaps if northern ireland can achieve peace, we can, too. you're their blueprint to follow. you're their proof of what is possible -- because hope is contagious. they're watching to see what you do next. now, some of that is up to your leaders. as someone who knows firsthand

how politics can encourage division and discourage cooperation, i admire the northern ireland executive and the northern ireland assembly all the more for making power- sharing work. that's not easy to do. it requires compromise, and it requires absorbing some pain from your own side. i applaud them for taking responsibility for law enforcement and for justice, and i commend their effort to "building a united community" -- important next steps along your transformational journey. because issues like segregated schools and housing, lack of jobs and opportunity -- symbols of history that are a source of pride for some and pain for others -- these are not tangential to peace, they're essential to it. if towns remain divided -- if catholics have their schools and buildings, and protestants have

theirs -- if we can't see ourselves in one another, if fear or resentment are allowed to harden, that encourages division. it discourages cooperation. ultimately, peace is just not about politics. it's about attitudes, about a sense of empathy, about breaking down the divisions that we create for ourselves in our own minds and our own hearts that don't exist in any objective reality, but that we carry with us generation after generation. and i know, because america, we, too, have had to work hard over the decades, slowly, gradually, sometimes painfully, in fits and starts, to keep perfecting our

union. a hundred and fifty years ago, we were torn open by a terrible conflict. our civil war was far shorter than the troubles, but it killed hundreds of thousands of our people. and, of course, the legacy of slavery endured for generations. even a century after we achieved our own peace, we were not fully united. when i was a boy, many cities still had separate drinking fountains and lunch counters and washrooms for blacks and whites. my own parents' marriage would have been illegal in certain states. and someone who looked like me often had a hard time casting a ballot, much less being on a ballot. but over time, laws changed, and

hearts and minds changed, sometimes driven by courageous lawmakers, but more often driven by committed citizens. politicians oftentimes follow rather than lead. and so, especially young people helped to push and to prod and to protest, and to make common cause with those who did not look like them. and that transformed america -- so that malia and sasha's generation, they have different attitudes about differences and race than mine and certainly different from the generation before that. and each successive generation creates a new space for peace and tolerance and justice and

fairness. and while we have work to do in many ways, we have surely become more tolerant and more just, more accepting, more willing to see our diversity in america not as something to fear, but as something to welcome because it's a source of our national strength. so as your leaders step forward to address your challenges through talks by all parties, they'll need you young people to keep pushing them, to create a space for them, to change attitudes. because ultimately, whether your communities deal with the past and face the future united together isn't something you have to wait for somebody else to do -- that's a choice you

have to make right now. it's within your power to bring about change. whether you are a good neighbor to someone from the other side of past battles -- that's up to you. whether you treat them with the dignity and respect they deserve that's up to you. whether you let your kids play with kids who attend a different church -- that's your decision. whether you take a stand against violence and hatred, and tell extremists on both sides that no matter how many times they attack the peace, they will not succeed -- that is in your hands. and whether you reach your own outstretched hand across dividing lines, across peace walls, to build trust in a spirit of respect -- that's up to you.

the terms of peace may be negotiated by political leaders, but the fate of peace is up to each of us. this peace in northern ireland has been tested over the past 15 years. it's been tested over the past year. it will be tested again. but remember something that president clinton said when he spoke here in belfast just a few weeks after the horrors of omagh. that bomb, he said, "was not the last bomb of the troubles, it was the opening shot of a vicious attack on the peace." and whenever your peace is attacked, you will have to choose whether to respond with the same bravery that you've summoned so far, or whether you succumb to the worst instincts.

those impulses that kept this great land divided for too long. you'll have to choose whether to keep going forward, not backwards. and you should know that so long as you are moving forward, america will always stand by you as you do. we will keep working closely with leaders in stormont, dublin and westminster to support your political progress. we'll keep working to strengthen our economies, including through efforts like the broad economic initiative announced on friday to unlock new opportunities for growth and investment between our two countries' businesses -- because jobs and opportunity are essential to peace. our scientists will keep collaborating with yours in

fields like nanotechnology and clean energy and health care that make our lives better and fuel economic growth on both sides of the atlantic -- because progress is essential to peace. and because knowledge and understanding is essential to peace, we will keep investing in programs that enrich both of us, programs like the one at belfast metropolitan college, which teaches students from west and north belfast the skills they need for new jobs, and exchange programs that have given thousands in northern ireland and the united states the chance to travel to each other's communities and learn from one another. now, one of those young people is here today. sylvia gordon is the director of an organization called groundwork northern ireland, which aims to bring about change from the ground up. where's sylvia? where's sylvia? is sylvia here somewhere? where is she?

she's here somewhere. you're here, too, yes. some guy just waved, he said, "i'm here." which is good, i appreciate you being here. as someone who got my start as a community organizer, i was so impressed with what sylvia has done, because a few years ago, sylvia visited the united states to learn more about how americans organize to improve their communities. so after she came home, sylvia rolled up her sleeves here in belfast and decided to do something about alexandra park. some of you may know this park. for years, it was thought to be the only park in europe still divided by a wall. think about that. in all of europe, that one park has got a wall in the middle of it. sylvia and her colleagues knew how hard it would be to do anything about a peace wall, but they reached out to the police,

they reached out to the department of justice. they brought together people from across the communities. they knew it was going to be hard, but they tried anyway. and together, they all decided to build a gate to open that wall. and now, people can walk freely through the park and enjoy the sun -- when it comes out -- just like people do every day in parks all around the world. a small bit of progress. but the fact that so far we've only got a gate open and the wall is still up means there's more work to do. and that's the work of your generation. so as long as more walls still stand, we will need more people like sylvia. we'll need more of you, young people, who imagine the world as it should be, who knock down walls, who knock down barriers,

who imagine something different and have the courage to make it happen. the courage to bring communities together, who make even the small impossibilities a shining example of what is possible. and that, more than anything, will shape what northern ireland looks like 15 years from now and eyond. all of you -- every single young person here today -- possess something the generation before yours did not, and that is an example to follow. when those who took a chance on